mark w. grinstaff- dendritic macromers for hydrogel formation: tailored materials for ophthalmic,...
TRANSCRIPT
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 1/18
HIGHLIGHT
Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation:Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic,and Biotech Applications
MARK W. GRINSTAFF1,2
1Department of Biomedical Engineering, Metcalf Center for Science and Engineering,Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 022152Department of Chemistry, Metcalf Center for Science and Engineering,
Boston University, Boston, Massachusetts 02215
Received 13 October 2007; accepted 25 October 2007DOI: 10.1002/pola.22525Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com).
ABSTRACT: Dendritic mac-
romolecules are well-defined
highly branched macromolecules
synthesized via a divergent or convergent approach. A salient
feature of the macromolecules
described herein, and a goal of
our research effort, is to prepare
dendritic macromolecules suita-
ble for in vitro and in vivo use
by focusing on biocompatible
building blocks and biodegrad-
able linkages. These dendritic
macromolecules can be subse-
quently crosslinked to form hy-
drogels using a photochemical ac-
rylate-based or a chemical liga-
tion strategy. The properties—
mechanical, swelling, degradation,and so forth—of the hydrogels
can be tuned by altering the com-
position, crosslinking chemistry,
wt %, generation number and so
forth. The utility and diverse appli-
cability is demonstrated through
successful use of these hydrogels
in three unique applications: hy-
drogel adhesives for repairing cor-
neal wounds, hydrogel scaffolds
for cartilage tissue engineering,
and hydrogel reaction chambers
for high throughput screening of
molecular recognition events.
VVC 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Polym Sci
Part A: Polym Chem 46: 383–400, 2008
Keywords: adhesives; biologi-
cal applications of polymers; bio-
materials; cartilage; cornea; den-
drimers; dendritic macromole-
cules; high throughput screening;
hydrogels; ophthalmology; ortho-
pedics; structure–property rela-
tionships; synthesis; wound repair
Correspondence to: M. W. Grinstaff (E-mail: [email protected])
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer Chemistry, Vol. 46, 383–400 (2008)
VVC 2007 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
383
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 2/18
Mark W. Grinstaff Mark W. Grinstaff is an Associate Professor of
Biomedical Engineering and Chemistry at Boston University. Mark
received his PhD from the University of Illinois under the mentorship
of Professor Kenneth S. Suslick and was an NIH postdoctoral fellow at
the California Institute of Technology with Professor Harry B. Gray.Mark’s awards include the ACS Nobel Laureate Signature Award, NSF
Career Award, Pew Scholar in the Biomedical Sciences, Camille Drey-
fus Teacher-Scholar, and an Alfred P. Sloan Research Fellowship. He
has published more than 90 peer-reviewed manuscripts and given more
than 170 oral presentations. He is a cofounder of two companies that
are commercializing his ideas. His current research activities involve
the synthesis of new macromolecules and amphiphiles, self-assembly
chemistry, tissue engineering, drug delivery, and nanotechnology.
INTRODUCTION
Dendritic macromolecules are finding ever increasing
uses, and in the medical arena are being investigated as
vehicles for drug delivery, contrast agents for imaging,
synthetic vectors for nucleic acid transfection, sealants
for tissue repair, and scaffolds for tissue regeneration
among other uses.1–16 These varied uses are a conse-
quence of the unique compositions, structures, and prop-
erties of these macromolecules. Dendrimers are highly
branched macromolecules possessing three main struc-
tural components: a core, internal branching layers, and
peripheral groups (Fig. 1).17–25 Unlike linear polymers
where growth is accomplished by adding single mono-
mers to the chain (1:1 growth), a dendrimer grows expo-nentially where each monomer is branched leading to
multiple additions (1:2, 1:3, etc. growth). Each layer in a
dendrimer is termed a generation (G) and thus as a den-
drimer grows through the addition of new monomers,
the generation number increases (G0, G1, Á Á Á Gn). As
the generation number of the dendrimer increases, the
structure in solution adopts a globular conformation.
The degree to which a dendrimer attains this globular
shape is determined by the multiplicities of the core and
branches, the orientation of the branching functional-
ities, the flexibility of the branching units, the length of
the repeat unit, and the solvent environment.26–30 Exam-
ples of known peripheral groups included anionic
(CO2À), cationic (NR4
+), neutral (NHC(O)ÀÀCH3), pol-
y(ethylene glycol) (PEG), or alkyl chains and these func-
tionalities play a significant role in the resultant proper-
ties. Taken all together, the chemical and structural
attributes of dendrimers translate to unique chemical and
physical properties (e.g., solubility, chemical reactivity,
viscosity, glass transition temperature).
Dendritic macromolecules are synthesized in a repeti-
tive manner by either a divergent31–38 (from core to pe-
riphery) or convergent25,39–45 (from periphery to core)
approach. As with any synthesis requiring a series of stepwise reactions (e.g., coupling and deprotection reac-
tions), high yields at each step are necessary to ensure
preparation of ample material. Consequently, chemically
well-defined, optimized, and robust reactions are used,
such as amidations, esterifications, hydrogenolysis, and
more recently click chemistry.46 In this highlight article,
I describe (1) the synthesis of the crosslinkable dendritic
macromolecules or macromers; (2) two different chemi-
cal crosslinking strategies with these macromers to pre-
pare hydrophilic macroscopic structures (i.e., hydro-
gels); and (3) the successful application of these hydro-
gels for sealing corneal lacerations and securing corneal
transplants, for repairing cartilage defects, and for creat-ing localized hydrogel reaction chambers for high
throughput screening.
Figure 1. Schematic of an idealized dendrimer.
MARK W. GRINSTAFF
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
384 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 3/18
SYNTHESIS
We are synthesizing and evaluating degradable and bio-
compatible dendritic macromolecules that can be subse-quently crosslinked to form hydrogels. We have reported
the preparation and characterization of a variety of poly-
ester, polyester–ether, and polyamide dendrimers and
dendrons composed of biocompatible building
blocks.13,16,47–57 We call these types of dendritic poly-
mers \biodendrimers." An example of a divergent syn-
thetic approach to a generation fourth poly(glycerol-suc-
cinic acid) ([G4]-PGLSAÀÀOH) dendrimer is shown in
Scheme 1, where a glycerol-succinate monomer is added
to a core using a series of stepwise esterification and
hydrogenolysis reactions.48 Briefly stated, the tetra-func-
tional G0 core, 2, was synthesized in two steps. First, the
monomer, 1 (2-(cis-1,3-O-benzylidene-glycerol)succinic
acid mono ester), was prepared by reacting succinic an-
hydride with cis-1,3-O-benzylidene-glycerol in pyridine.
Next, 1 was coupled to 1.2 equivalents of cis-1,3-O-ben-
zylideneglycerol, in the presence of two equivalents of
N , N -dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCC) and 0.5 equiva-
lent of 4-(dimethylamino)pyridinium 4-toluenesulfonate
(DPTS) to yield the core, [G0]-PGLSA-bzld. The blzd
group of the core was removed by hydrogenolysis (10%
Pd/C and H2) in tetrahydrofuran to give the deprotected
core, [G0]-PGLSAÀÀOH, 2. Next, the monomer 1 was
coupled to 2 in the presence of DCC and DPTS followed
by hydrogenolysis to afford the G1 dendrimer. These
esterification and hydrogenolysis reactions wererepeated to give the higher generation dendrimers, and a
G4 PGLSA dendrimer, 5, was prepared.
The convergent synthesis to a generation three ly-
sine–cysteine dendron ([G3]-(Lys)7-Cys8) is shown in
Scheme 2.55 In this example, sequential amide forming
condensation and deprotection reactions were used to
prepare the dendron. The activated pentafluorophenol-
esters of the amino acid building blocks were used,
ZLys(Z)OPFP and IsoCys(Boc)OPFP as this coupling
approach provided the highest yields and cleanest reac-
tions. First, ZLys(Z)OPFP was coupled to LysO-
MeÁ2HCl in the presence of N , N -diisopropylethylamine
(DIEA) and l-hydroxybenzotriazole (HOBT). The Z pro-
tecting group was removed via catalytic hydrogenolysis
(10% Pd/C and H2). For the next step, BocLys(Boc)
OPFP was coupled to the growing dendron. The Boc pro-
tected lysine derivative was used instead of Z protected
since this gave better solubility of the larger Lys-dendron
in organic solvents. Finally, the IsoCys(Boc) OPFP was
added to the dendron and the Boc and Iso protecting
groups of cysteine were removed using trifluoro acetic
acid (TFA) and 1 N HCl in MeOH, respectively, to afford
Scheme 1. Divergent synthesis to a generation fourth poly(glycerol-succinic acid) ([G4]-
PGLSA-OH) dendrimer.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 385
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 4/18
[G3]-(Lys)7-Cys8), 6. In both reaction schemes, the yields
for each individual coupling and deprotection steps were
90% or better. Additional examples of recently prepared
structures besides those shown in Schemes 1 and 2, include
a generation four layered dendrimer composed of succinate
and adapic layers (poly(glycerol-succinic-co-adapic acid)
[G4,G3]-PGLAA-[G2,G1,G0]-PGLSA-OH) 7, a genera-
tion two-one PGLSA dendrimer possessing both carbox-
ylic acid and alkyl chain peripheral groups ([G2-1]-
PGLSAÀÀCO2HÀÀC14) 8, and a generation three hybrid
dendritic-linear macromolecule ([G3]-PGLSAÀÀOH)-
PEG) 9 are shown in Figure 2. Initial cell cytotoxicity stud-
ies show that the dendritic macromolecules possess mini-
mal toxicity and do not induce more death than what is
witnessed in untreated controls.
These synthetic routes to dendritic macromolecules,
whether divergent or convergent, allow for precise com-
positional control within the core, internal branching
layers, and peripheral groups of the macromolecule as
well as the use of a wide-variety of different monomers.
Scheme 2. Convergent synthesis to a generation three lysine-cysteine dendron ([G3]-(Lys)7-
Cys8).
Figure 2. Structures of a generation four layered (poly(glycerol-succinic-co-adapic acid)
[G4,G3]-PGLAA-[G2,G1,G0]-PGLSA-OH) dendrimer, a generation four poly(glycerol-succinic-
acid) dendrimer possessing both carboxylic acid and alkyl chain peripheral groups ([G2-1]-
PGLSA-CO2H-C14), and a generation three hybrid dendritic-linear macromolecule ([G3]-
PGLSA-OH)-PEG).
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
386 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 5/18
This level of control during synthesis enables the prepa-
ration of macromolecules possessing a unique molecular
weight or very narrow molecular weight distribution,
unlike most linear polymers. The narrow distribution of
molecular weights allows for the correlation of a specific
physical property, mechanical property, or biological
response to a single specific chemical structure as
opposed to a collection of different molecular weight
structures, as with most linear polymers. The construc-
tion of such structure–property relationships and under-
standings is extremely useful in the design and evalua-
tion of a macromolecule for an intended application.
CROSSLINKING APPROACHES
TO HYDROGELS
Hydrogels are highly hydrated, crosslinked polymeric
networks that are being investigated for a range of bio-
medical applications from drug delivery to scaffolds for
tissue growth.58–62 We have reported two approaches for
preparing hydrogels from these dendritic macromole-
cules. Importantly, both of these methods enable in situ
formation of a hydrogel where an aqueous solution of
the macromer (i.e., the crosslinkable derivative of the
dendritic macromolecule) is delivered to an in vivo site
and is subsequently crosslinked to form a three-dimen-
sional hydrogel that conforms to the shape of the defect.
In the first approach, the hydroxyl peripheral groups of
the dendritic macromolecule are modified, before injec-
tion, to contain a functional group susceptible to free-
radical polymerization, such as an acrylate.13 Upon free-
radical polymerization, many acrylate groups on the
dendritic macromolecules are crosslinked to afford a
hydrogel (Fig. 3). This polymerization reaction can be
initiated using a thermal- or a photo-activated catalyst.
Given our interest in biomedical applications, the need
to work in aqueous solutions, the requirement to work in
the presence of biologics (e.g., proteins and cells), and
the desire to minimize heat generation during the poly-
merization reaction, we have chosen to use a photo-
chemical route. Specifically, we use a visible photoiniti-
ating system that comprises eosin Y, 1-vinyl-pyrrilidi-
none, and triethanol amine. Excitation with an argon ion
laser (kmax¼
514 nm) of an aqueous solution containingthe acrylate-modified dendritic macromolecule and a
small quantity of the eosin Y photoinitiating system ini-
tiates the free radical polymerization of the methacrylate
(MA) moieties on the dendritic polymer. This photoiniti-
ating system has been used for a number of applications
and is nontoxic.61,63–65 The resulting hydrogel is hydro-
philic, transparent, and, depending on the macromer and
solution weight percent, can be soft and flexible or stiff.
In the second approach, the peripheral groups of the
dendritic macromolecule are decorated with nucleo-
philes and subsequently reacted with another polymer
containing electrophiles or vice versa. A number of
nucleophile–electrophile crosslinking chemistries areavailable including the well known reactions of amines
with N -hydroxysuccinimide or thiols with maleimide.
However, we are interested in exploring crosslinking
chemistry which occurs rapidly at 37 8C under neutral
aqueous conditions without the generation of side-prod-
ucts and is amenable to preparing hydrogels with vary-
ing performance lifetimes. Moreover, the reactions must
be chemoselective (i.e., only coupling between the cor-
rect partners) and possess a high tolerance to a range of
other chemical functionalities (e.g., amines, thiols, car-
boxylic acids) that are present under physiological con-
ditions. Consequently, we have selected reactions that
belong to a family of chemical ligations, which havebeen applied successfully to the synthesis of a variety of
proteins.66–70 We are investigating the use of thiazoli-
dine or pseudoproline linkages, which are formed
between an N -terminal cysteine and an aldehyde or an
ester–aldehyde (Fig. 4).55,56 For this approach, the den-
dritic polymer must contain three or more N -terminal
cysteines and the PEG crosslinker must contain at least
two terminal aldehyde groups, or vice versa. Specifi-
cally, we mixed aqueous solutions of a dendron contain-
ing N -terminal cysteines and a PEG-dialdehyde (PEG-
DA) or PEG-diesteraldehyde (PEG-DEA) to afford a
crosslinked network via formation of thiazolidine or
pseudo proline linkages throughout the hydrogel, respec-
tively.55,56 As shown in Figure 4, the amine reacts with
the aldehyde followed by thiazolidine formation, which
is a reversible reaction. If an ester linkage is beta to the
thiozolidine, then an O,N acyl migration occurs afford-
ing the pseudoproline—this step is irreversible. A photo-
graph of one such hydrogel is shown in Figure 5.
Using these two crosslinking strategies, we have pre-
pared a variety of hydrogels for characterization as well
as for evaluation in specific applications. In the follow-
Figure 3. Photochemical crosslinking reaction to form the
hydrogels.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 387
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 6/18
ing sections, three successful applications of the dendri-
tic macromolecules are described. The rationale for the
selection of the specific macromer, the benefits of the
chosen crosslinking approach, and the advantages of our
approach over current methods are highlighted in each
section. Specifically, we will describe the use of (1) pep-
tide-based dendrons and chemical ligation crosslinking
chemistry to repair corneal lacerations and to secure cor-
neal transplants, (2) photocrosslinkable PGLSA-PEG
based dendrimers for cartilage tissue engineering, and
(3) Lys-PEG based dendrimers for creating localizedhydrogel reaction chambers for molecular screening.
OPHTHALMIC APPLICATIONS
The repair of corneal wounds and the restoration of
patient vision are of significant clinical importance. Cor-
neal wounds arise from traumatic injury (e.g., perfora-
tions, lacerations), infections, and surgical procedures
(e.g., transplants, incisions for cataract removal and in-
traocular lens implantation, laser-assisted in situ kerato-
mileusis (LASIK)). Currently, nylon sutures are used to
repair these wounds and depending on the extent of
injury, multiple sutures may be required to secure the
damaged tissue and restore the structural integrity of the
cornea. It is estimated that globally more than 12 million
procedures per year use nylon sutures to close ocular
wounds. However, sutures are not ideal because the
suture solely provides mechanical closure and does not
actively participate in healing, in addition to the suturing
procedure being inherently invasive.71–74 More specifi-
cally, sutures are suboptimal for this application because
(1) the placement of the sutures inflicts additional
trauma to corneal tissue, especially when multiple passes
are needed; (2) sutures can act as a nidus for infection
and incite corneal inflammation and vascularization
increasing the incidence of corneal scarring; (3) corneal
suturing often yields uneven healing, resulting in anastigmatism; (4) sutures are also prone to becoming
loose and/or broken postoperatively and require addi-
tional attention for prompt removal; (5) sutures require
removal by an ophthalmologist, often months after the
operation creating a new opportunity for infection; and
(6) suturing requires an acquired technical skill that can
vary widely from surgeon to surgeon, thus influencing
the overall success of the operation. Consequently, there
is clinical interest in a sealant to replace or supplement
sutures in the repair of corneal wounds.
There are precedents for the use of sealants and these
alternative approaches have had a positive clinical
impact. For example, cyanoacrylate glues were reportedin the 1960s by Webster et al. for the repair of corneal
perforations.75 More recently, fibrin adhesives have been
explored for closing corneal wounds. However, both
these glues have one or more of the following limitations
including ease of application, preparation time, potential
for viral transmittance, heat generation, toxic byprod-
ucts, abrasive materials, and limited effectiveness. A
number of complications have been reported for cyanoa-
crylate glues including cataract formation, corneal infil-
tration, granulomatous keratitis, glaucoma, and retinal
toxicity.76–84 Cyanoacrylate and fibrin glues are used
\off-label" and at the discretion of the surgeon to repair
the wound.Design requirements for an idealized ocular adhesive
generally fall into two main categories. The sealant must
be capable of withstanding a variety of mechanical/opti-
cal constraints present in the ocular environment in addi-
tion to possessing favorable biological characteristics to
Figure 5. Photograph of a hydrogel on top of a package of
nonabsorbable suture.
Figure 4. (Top) chemical ligation reactions yielding either
a thiazolidine (I) or pseudoproline linkage (II). (Bottom)
Dendritic and PEG based macromers for forming the hydro-
gels.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
388 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 7/18
prevent bacterial incursion and to promote native tissue
ingrowth. The ideal material would chemically be capa-
ble of crosslinking on the moist ocular surface in a rapid
and controlled manner, ideally setting in 30 s or less
upon receiving the initiator signal. Additionally, a solu-
tion viscosity (<
100 cP) allows for precise placement of the sealant by the technician. Upon gelation, the result-
ant hydrogel must provide significant closure to main-
tain both the structural integrity of the eye and be capa-
ble of withstanding high intraocular pressures (IOPs)
(>80 mmHg). In addition, the sealant should possess
elasticity greater than that of the corneal tissue to disfa-
vor the formation of an astigmatism. The resultant
hydrogel should also have a refractive index similar to
that of the underlying tissue (1.42) and maintain diffu-
sion properties to allow for gas and nutrient exchange
(>23 10À7 cm2 /s for small molecules). After successful
closure for days to months depending on the extent of
the wound, a characteristic that is tunable with a hydro-gel, the sealant would then be either absorbed or exuded
from the wound.
We have successfully used dendritic macromolecules
as macromers to form hydrogel sealants via the photo-
chemical or chemical ligation crosslinking chemistry to
repair corneal lacerations and perforations,13,16,85,86 seal
cataract incisions,55 secure corneal transplants,56,86 and
close LASIK flaps.85,87 To highlight the importance of
crosslinking chemistry within one type of hydrogel seal-
ant system, we will focus our discussion to full thickness
corneal lacerations and corneal transplants. Corneal lac-
erations that are caused by trauma, infection, inflamma-
tion, or surgical procedures are an ophthalmic emer-gency that can lead to loss of vision. These wounds are
repaired using sutures and as we have discussed earlier,
suturing has significant drawbacks.
Corneal transplantation or penetrating keratoplasty
(PKP) is one of the most common and successful tissue
transplants.88 In a corneal transplantation, the recipient
cornea undergoes a large circular full-thickness cutting
to remove the damaged tissue, after which a previously
cut donor corneal button is manually sutured to the re-
cipient corneal rim. The standard of care today involves
16 running sutures to secure the new transplant tissue in
place. The major disadvantages related to this procedure
include delayed visual recovery, suprachoroidal hemor-
rhage, neovascularization, microbial keratitis, the need
for postoperative suture removal (typically 9 months af-
ter transplantation), and surgically-induced astigma-
tism.89–92
Among the design parameters for these two indica-
tions (corneal lacerations and transplants), the lifetime
of the hydrogel sealant is perhaps the one that necessi-
tates the largest variance in overall requirements. For a
corneal laceration, the sealant must remain in place for
2–4 days to allow for re-endothelization of the corneal
wound site and closure of this relatively small wound
(3–5 mm incision). On the other hand, a sealant for
securing a full-thickness circular 8 mm corneal trans-
plant must perform for months as the host tissue requires
time to integrate with the tissue. To achieve this longev-ity differential, we chose to evaluate the dendron con-
taining N -terminal cysteines ([G2]-(Lys)3-Cys4) and
PEG-DA or PEG-DEA to afford a crosslinked network
via formation of thiazolidine or pseudoproline linkages,
respectively. Hydrogel weight loss, as a function of time
at 25 8C when stored in a humidity chamber, is dramati-
cally different for the two hydrogels. The hydrogel pre-
pared from [G2]-(Lys)3-Cys4 and PEG-DA is intact for
several days whereas the [G2]-(Lys)3-Cys4 PEG-DEA
hydrogel is stable for more than 4 months.56
To determine whether a hydrogel sealant prepared
from [G2]-(Lys)3-Cys4 and PEG-DA would secure a 4.1
mm full thickness corneal laceration, we performed a se-ries of experiments. A 4.1-mm corneal laceration was
made in several enucleated eyes. These wound were ei-
ther left to self-seal, closed using one interrupted 10-0
nylon suture, or closed using the hydrogel sealant. For
the hydrogel sealant, dendron ([G2]-(Lys)3-Cys4) and
PEG-DA were mixed quickly at room temperature and
then approximately 20 lL of the hydrogel sealant was
applied to the wound. A hydrogel was formed upon mix-
ing within 20–30 s as a result of the rapid formation of
thiazolidine linkages. Figure 6 shows a sealed 4.1-mm
corneal laceration repaired using the hydrogel sealant.
Within 5 min of repairing the wound, regardless of the
closure methodology utilized, saline was injected in theanterior chamber via a syringe pump until the repaired
Figure 6. Leaking pressures for hydrogel sealant, sutured,
and untreated 4.1 mm corneal lacerations. Photograph of a
sealed wound (insert).
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 389
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 8/18
laceration leaked. In this ex vivo study, the mean leaking
pressure for the hydrogel sealant, sutured, and untreated
eyes (n ¼ 3/sample) were 160, 75, and <10 mmHg,
respectively. The values for the hydrogel sealant and
sutures are above normal IOP of about 12 mmHg. The
wound is not sealed using only the dendron or PEG-DAhydrogel precursors alone but requires the combination
of both to operate effectively. Similar results were
obtained in the treatment of 3-mm cataract incisions.55
The mean leaking pressure for the hydrogel sealant (n ¼
8) and suture (n ¼ 2) treated eyes were 184 and
54 mmHg, respectively. Next, we evaluated if this
hydrogel adhesive would prevent the influx of extraocu-
lar surface fluid into the wound.93 For these experiments,
a cataract incision was made in several additional human
enucleated eyes and then the wounds were either left to
self-seal or treated with the sealant. India ink was
applied to the ocular surface and the IOP was cyclically
raised and lowered between 0 and 100 mmHg six times.Histological analysis showed that India ink entered the
self-sealed wounds but not the sealant-treated corneas.
During the cyclic raising and lowering of IOP, we used
real-time optical coherence tomography to image the ad-
hesive treated wound. Because of its elastic characteris-
tics, the sealant did not dislodge but stretched to con-
form to the wound during the changes in IOP. No leak-
age was observed around the wound site. In regards to
the overall efficacy, the hydrogel sealant secures the cor-
neal wound, provides a water-tight seal, and withstands
higher pressures and stresses placed on a wound than
conventional suture treated wounds. The procedure with
the hydrogel sealant is facile and requires less surgicaltime than conventional suturing, does not inflict addi-
tional tissue trauma, and does not require the use of a
laser—unlike the photocrosslinkable corneal sealants—
which reduces the need for additional instruments as
well as eliminates the small but still present potential
risk from laser eye damage.
With this success, we next determined whether the
hydrogel sealant prepared from dendron ([G2]-(Lys)3-
Cys4) and PEG-DEA would secure the incision between
the host and graft corneal tissue in a transplant. In this
ex vitro model, an 8-mm central corneal trephination
was made in an enucleated eye and then this newly
formed button was autografted back to the original eye.
The host–graft tissue interface was secured using
sutures, sutures combined with the hydrogel sealant, or
the hydrogel sealant alone (Fig. 7). The leaking pressure
for the autografted eyes was measured as we have done
for the corneal laceration studies to determine the extent
to which the wound was sealed.55 The leaking pressure
for autografts receiving 16 interrupted 10-0 nylon
sutures was 13 6 5 mmHg (n ¼ 4). When the hydrogel
sealant was applied (33 wt %; 60 lL) to the sutured
wound in addition to the 16 interrupted sutures, the leak-
ing pressure increased to 63 6 7 mmHg (n ¼ 4).
Increasing the macromer wt % to 50% (60 lL) with 16
interrupted sutures afforded a leaking pressure of 101 6
5 mmHg (Fig. 7). We were unable to secure the auto-
graft to a level above normal IOP when the hydrogel
sealant was used alone indicating that this hydrogel does
not possess sufficient adhesivity by itself to secure a
PKP. However, an additional benefit to this hydrogel
sealant, beyond closing the wound is the potential of thehydrogel barrier formed at the wound interface to pre-
vent the flow of extraocular surface fluid and protect the
wound from postoperative infections. The transport of
India ink across the hydrogel can be monitored as we
have done for the corneal wound study described earlier.
When India ink is applied to the wound, the dye does
not penetrate into the anterior chamber indicating that
the wound interface is secured. The resulting crosslinked
hydrogel sealants are transparent, elastic, hydrophilic,
adhesive, and act as a physical protective barrier to the
ocular surface.
ORTHOPEDIC APPLICATIONS
Osteoarthritis (OA) is a common form of arthritis that
affects 100 million individuals in the world today. In the
early stages of osteoarthritis, proteoglycans and collage-
nous proteins are lost from the cartilage tissue followed
by the formation of small discrete lesions.94,95 As the
disease progresses, these lesions grow and eventually
the subchondral bone is exposed.96–100 This degenera-
tion of articular cartilage leads to a loss of mobility,
Figure 7. Leaking pressures for hydrogel sealant + suture,
suture, and hydrogel sealant treated corneal autografts. Photo-
graph of a sealed hydrogel sealant + 16-sutured corneal auto-
graft (insert).
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
390 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 9/18
severe and debilitating pain, and a reduction in the over-
all quality of life for the patients. Depending on the se-
verity of the disease, the current clinical treatments
include the chronic use of anti-inflammatory drugs, abra-
sion, mosaicoplasty, microfracture surgery, and chon-
drocyte transplantation.
94,101–106
The last resort for OApatients is total joint replacement, but this treatment is
costly and traumatic. Yet, these approaches meet with
varied successes due to the lack of a vascular and lym-
phatic system hindering the regenerative capacity of
native cartilage. Cartilage tissue injuries never fully heal
and only worsen with time.94,107 Consequently, there is
significant clinical interest in creating a therapy based
on tissue-engineering principles to restore function to
the damaged cartilage tissue site.
Typically, such strategies to repair cartilage involve a
combination of a polymer-based scaffold, cells, and
growth factors to create the required native carti-
lage.94,108–111
The scaffold plays a key role in the repair of osteochondral defects, and it must meet a number of
design criteria (1) produce a resorbable three-dimen-
sional porous structure in vivo; (2) possess similar me-
chanical properties to the native tissue it is replacing; (3)
support the infiltration, proliferation, and/or differentia-
tion of the required local cell phenotype; (4) be biocom-
patible and nonimmunogenic in vivo; and (5) integrate
with the surrounding matrix in the defect. The scaffold
must ultimately guide the restoration of the tissue during
healing.
Of the various scaffolds materials examined by many
groups, those based on photocrosslinkable hydrogel scaf-
folds are showing considerable promise.59,112–116 Thein situ photocrosslinking ability of these systems is highly
desirable in cartilage tissue-engineering application for a
variety of reasons. First, it allows the uncrosslinked mac-
romer solution to be mixed with cells or soluble factors,
such as growth factors or cytokines, prior to defect site
delivery. Second, the high water content of the scaffold
allows for efficient diffusion of nutrients and oxygen
into, and waste and carbon dioxide out of the hydrogel.
Third, the uncrosslinked macromer solution can easily
flow into irregularly shaped defects common to damaged
or diseased cartilage, facilitating integration with the
surrounding native tissue. Fourth, the liquid state of the
macromer solution allows access to surgically inaccessi-
ble trauma sites via endoscope-assisted (micro)surgery.
Lastly, these materials, once crosslinked in situ, provide
immediate adhesion and mechanical integrity to the
defect site at the time of implantation.
Given our interest in dendritic macromers and hydro-
gels, we evaluated the photocrosslinkable derivatives of
the PGLSA-polyethylene glycol dendritic-linear copoly-
mers (PGLSAÀÀOH)2-PEG as scaffolds for cartilage tis-
sue engineering.65 In addition to satisfying the require-
ments above, these dendritic macromers allow increased
crosslink density of the scaffold without significantly
increasing the polymer concentration when compared
with linear polymer analogs. This approach leads to
improved mechanical properties and minimal swelling
of the hydrogel scaffold, while maintaining (bio)degrad-able sites such as ester linkages throughout the structure.
Specifically, we modified the ([G1]-PGLSAÀÀOH)2-
PEG polymer to contain peripheral terminal MA groups
([G1]-PGLSA-MA)2-PEG (Fig. 8). Once this macromer
is prepared, it can be dissolved in an aqueous solution
containing the visible photoinitiating system (i.e., eosin
Y, 1-vinyl-pyrrilidinone, and triethanol amine) and a
hydrogel is formed upon photolysis with an argon ion
laser at 514 nm. This eosin Y based photocrosslinking
process is mild and has the following benefits: the vivid
pink color of eosin Y in the hydrogel can be easily
observed when placed in the defect site facilitating effi-
cient filling, and the dye is bleached during the cross-linking reaction, confirming reaction completion, and
uniformity of the reaction.
Cylindrical hydrogel samples of known polymer con-
centration and dimensions were prepared and then used
for the swelling, degradation, and mechanical testing in
vitro. Hydrogels of 7.5, 10, and 15 wt % polymer
showed minimal change in shape, gaining in weight only
10% over 30 days in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) at
RT. This is in contrast to linear PEG dimethacrylates
that can swell in excess of 100%. The equilibrium com-
pressive modulus E was dependent on polymer wt %, as
expected, with E increasing significantly from about
3 kPa at the lowest macromer concentration to 600 kPaat the highest macromer concentration (see Fig. 9). The
complex shear modulus |G*| of the hydrogels showed
limited concentration dependence, increasing from about
1–40 kPa, over the concentration range.
Chondrocyte-hydrogel constructs at two different
concentrations (7.5 and 15 wt %) were then prepared
with freshly isolated porcine chondrocytes, placed in
individual wells, and cultured in chondrocyte culture
medium in a humidified atmosphere at 37 8C with 5%
CO2. The chondrocyte-hydrogel constructs were har-
Figure 8. Chemical structure of the ([G1]-PGLSA-MA)2-
PEG macromer used to form the hydrogel scaffolds for chon-
drocyte entrapment.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 391
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 10/18
vested and processed for histology at 4 and 12 weeks
(n ¼ 3). The paraffin-embedded sections were stained
with H and E, Safranin-O (marker for proteoglycans), or
Masson’s Trichrome (marker for collagen) for histologi-cal evaluation. Sections were also immunostained for
the presence of Types I and II collagen. As shown in
Figure 10, the encapsulated chondrocytes showed no
signs of dedifferentiation and retained their rounded
morphology. After 2 and 4 weeks of culture, Safranin-O
and Masson’s Trichrome staining indicated that chon-
drocytes encapsulated in the hydrogels at the lower mac-
romer concentration accumulated significant amounts of
extracellular matrix rich in proteoglycans and collagen,
respectively, (Fig. 10). In contrast, cells encapsulated in
hydrogels at the higher macromer concentration pro-
duced extracellular matrix only in the immediate area
around each cell. Sections of cell-hydrogel constructs
prepared from the 7.5 wt % concentration stained
strongly for Type II collagen demonstrating the accumu-
lation of extracellular matrix with molecular compo-
nents present as found in native articular cartilage. No
significant staining for Type I collagen was observed in-
dicative of fibrocartilage. However, the cell-hydrogelconstructs at 7.5 wt % were degrading over time and, by
4 weeks, some samples had disintegrating into several
smaller fragments. This degradation behavior was not
observed for the cell-hydrogel constructs formed at 15
wt %, even after extended culture time (12 weeks).
Importantly, the 7.5 wt % hydrogel scaffolds were sup-
portive of cartilaginous extracellular matrix synthesis.
However, these hydrogel scaffolds possessed limited
mechanical integrity.
To slow the degradation rate of the hydrogel scaffold
but still retain the favorable characteristics of the 7.5 wt %
hydrogel scaffold in terms of matrix accumulation,
we prepared a new macromer, which contained ester aswell as carbamate linkages.117 We prepared a first gener-
ation dendritic macromolecule composed of glycerol,
succinic acid, b-alanine, and PEG using a divergent
method as shown in Scheme 3. As before, photolysis of
an aqueous solution containing the methacrylated poly
(glycerol beta-alanine)-PEG macromolecule (([G1]-
PGLBA-MA)2-PEG) and the eosin Y photoinitiating
system afforded a crosslinked hydrogel scaffold. The
hydrogel scaffolds at 5, 10, and 20% exhibited no signif-
icant swelling similar to what was seen earlier with the
([G1]-PGLSA-MA)2-PEG based hydrogel scaffolds.
Next, the mechanical properties were measured over a
concentration range of 5–20% w/v. The mechanical
Figure 9. Mechanical properties of the hydrogel scaffold
prepared from ([G1]-PGLSA-MA)2-PEG and ([G1]-PGLBA-
MA)2-PEG compared to articular cartilage.
Figure 10. Histological sections of 7.5 and 15% macromer concentration hydrogels after 2 and
4 weeks incubation. (Left) Red indicates proteoglycans in the Safranin-O stained sections,
(middle) green indicates collagen in the Masson’s Trichrome stained sections and (right) red
indicates Type II collagen in the immunostained sections, no significant Type I collagen was
detected at either concentration. The length of the inserted bar is 100 lm.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
392 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 11/18
properties showed high concentration dependence with
the higher polymer concentrations affording stiffer mate-
rials. Specifically, the mechanical properties of the
hydrogels ranged from about 50–900 kPa for the com-
pressive modulus, and 2–80 kPa for the complex shear
modulus. With respect to native articular cartilage, asshown in Figure 9, the (([G1]-PGLBA-MA)2-PEG)
based hydrogel approaches the mechanical properties of
articular cartilage.
Next, we evaluated the integrity of the hydrogels in a
rabbit knee confined defect model under dynamic me-
chanical testing. Briefly, a simulated osteochondral defect
(3 mm in diameter 3 10 mm in depth) was drilled in the
center of excised medial femoral condyles of New Zea-
land white rabbits and filled with 50 lL of the macromer
and then photo-crosslinked with an argon ion laser for
120 s. The cleaned femur and tibia were then mounted to
the load frame of a custom designed computer controlled,
servomotor-actuator system for simulating rabbit knee ki-
nematics. The hydrogel scaffold was subjected to
dynamic mechanical loading (300 cycles) with a physio-
logically relevant load (30 N at the end of the tibia simu-
lating the body weight of a 3 kg rabbit). Upon completion
of the loading regimen and under visual inspection, the
hydrogel scaffold at 5, 10, and 20% w/v remained intact
in the defect site. The integrity of the hydrogel and the
hydrogel–bone interface was further assessed by mag-
netic resonance imaging. As shown in Figure 11, the 10
wt % hydrogel was still present and integrated with the
surrounding tissue after the dynamic mechanical testing
as were all the other weight percent samples.117
Finally, we conducted an initial in vivo experiment to
evaluate the hydrogel performance in a full-thickness
osteochondral defect. We selected the carbamate–ester– ether (([G1]-PGLBA-MA)2-PEG) hydrogel scaffold
based on its low swelling and high E and G properties.
In addition, the hydrogel scaffold prepared from this
macromer will likely have a longer performance lifetime
than the poly(ester)-based biodendrimers.65 The aqueous
solution containing the crosslinkable biodendrimer and
the photoiniating system was injected into a preformed
defect located in the right knee of adult New Zealand
white rabbits (n ¼ 3). Next the solution was photocros-
slinked using an argon ion laser for several minutes or
until the pink color was gone confirming the crosslink-
ing reaction was completed. A control untreated group
was used in a similar defect located in the left knee of
the same rabbits. At 6 months, the rabbits were sacri-
ficed and histology was performed to determine cellular-
ity (H and E stain), collagen (Masson trichrome), and
proteoglycans (Safranin O stain) content. All three stains
revealed that in the hydrogel scaffold treated defects, the
hydrogel was well integrated with the surrounding tissue
with strong staining for collagen and proteoglycans
(Fig. 12). Importantly, the healing response in the hydro-
gel-filled knees exhibited morphological and biochemi-
Scheme 3. Synthesis of the ([G1]-PGLBA-MA)2-PEG macromer.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 393
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 12/18
cal characteristics consistent with normal–hyaline–tis-
sue, whereas the unfilled controls appeared to be filledirregularly and stained less for collagen and proteogly-
can content. The resulting crosslinked hydrogel scaf-
folds are integrated with the surrounding tissue, mechan-
ically resilient, and promote extracellular matrix produc-
tion in the wound site. These dendritic macromers
possessed a number of favorable properties when used
to prepare scaffolds for the repair of cartilage defects.
BIOTECH APPLICATIONS
Our increasing ability to access and analyze genomic
and proteomic information through microarrays has
afforded substantial scientific and medical advances.
These advances range from greater understanding of
fundamental biological processes to the evaluation of
new drug targets for once untreatable diseases. The ac-
quisition of such biological information relies heavily on
Figure 11. (Left) Photograph of a biodendrimer scaffold filled osteochondral defect. (Right)
Sagittal plane MR image of a biodendrimer scaffold filled osteochondral defect.
Figure 12. Histological section of unfilled (top) and filled (bottom) osteochondral defects. a)
Masson’s trichrome and b) Safranin O staining. Scale bar ¼ 100 lm.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
394 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 13/18
high throughput and high-density screening of molecu-
lar–molecular and molecular–cellular interactions.118–127
Microarray technology is one screening method
which has received considerable attention given that
data can be obtained in a spatially arrayed, high-density
format. However, many of the formats in use rely oncovalent attachment chemistry of one component to a
solid support.123,128–148 This approach affects molecular
and macromolecular properties, requires prior modifica-
tion of the substrate, limits the diversity of assays, and
creates unwanted molecular interactions at the surface—
all of which can influence assay outcome and results.
Eliminating the need for covalent attachment to the sup-
port prior to screening enables investigation of a greater
number and type of molecular interactions while mini-
mizing the biases as a result of the screening approach
undertaken.
Consequently, to address these limitations and de-
velop alternative high throughput screening approaches,we have prepared and evaluated crosslinked immobi-
lized hydrogels as general reaction chambers for screen-
ing (bio)molecular and (bio)macromolecular interac-
tions.149 As described earlier, dendritic macromolecules
possess a number of favorable properties as macromers
for hydrogel formation. For this application, we need to
form small, micron-sized hydrogel reaction chambers on
an aldehyde coated glass surface and thus selected
(Lys)2-PEG in combination with (CHO)2-PEG as the
hydrogel precursors, after a preliminary study of several
potential candidates. The (Lys)2-PEG reacts with the ter-
minal aldehydes of the (CHO)2-PEG as well as the sur-
face immobilized aldehydes to afford Schiff-base link-
ages and a highly crosslinked hydrogel network adhered
to the glass surface. Using an OmniGrid AccentTM
microarraying robot equipped with a Stealth Printhead
containing Stealth Micro Spotting Pins, we dispensed 1
nL volumes of the hydrogel precursors in a solution
containing the (bio)molecule/(bio)macromolecule of in-
terest on the aldehyde modified glass slides (Fig. 13).
After printing, the slides were washed with 1% w/w bo-
vine serum albumin (BSA) in PBS (pH ¼ 7.4) to block
the remaining surface aldehydes in the nonspecific inter-
mediate regions. Importantly, this can all be done under
mild conditions (aqueous solution; pH ¼ 7.4; RT) with-
out the need of prior derivatization of the printed (bio)-
molecule/(bio)macromolecule (Fig. 13). This screening
technique is amenable to high throughput analyses as&50,000 torroid-like hydrogel chambers can be printed
on a single 18 3 72 mm2 glass slide. A photograph of a
reaction chamber is shown in Figure 14.
To evaluate the capability of these hydrogel reaction
chambers for screening small molecule–protein, pro-
Figure 13. Construction of IgG immobilized hydrogels on aldehyde coated slides using
(CHO)2-PEG and (Lys-NH2)2-PEG.
Figure 14. (Left-Top) optical and fluorescent (left-bottom)
image of two hydrogel reaction chambers containing aRNA
(250–5000 nt) (top row) and controls (without aRNA)
(bottom row) after probing with Cy5-aRNA (60–200 nt).
(Right) Example of a screening experiment performed with
an array of reaction chambers.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 395
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 14/18
tein–protein, and nucleic acid–nucleic acid molecular
recognition, we performed a series of well-known model
reactions. For small molecule–protein interactions, we
prepared hydrogel reaction chambers containing biotin
and then probed the chambers with Cy5 labeled strepta-
vidin. The Cy5-streptavidin was successfully incorpo-rated into the hydrogel chambers and bound the biotin.
A twofold increase in red fluorescence relative to control
chamber lacking biotin was observed. Next, we investi-
gated a protein–protein interaction by printing goat IgG
in the hydrogel chambers and then probing with Cy5 la-
beled protein G. A greater than a two-fold increase in
red fluorescence was observed for the hydrogel cham-
bers containing IgG relative to control hydrogel cham-
bers without IgG indicating the formation of the IgG-
protein G complex. A control experiment with BSA
loaded chambers showed no red fluorescence when
probed with the Cy5-Protein G, and, likewise, a reaction
chamber loaded with IgG when probed with Cy5-strep-tavidin showed no red fluorescence. All together, these
data confirm that specific protein–protein recognition
within the scaffold is occurring and that the fluorescence
signals are not merely a result of nonspecific physical
entrapment of the protein in the hydrogel chamber dur-
ing the assay.
The hydrogel reaction chambers are not limited to
studying protein–protein interactions, as we were able to
obtain similar results with nucleic acid–nucleic acid rec-
ognition. As shown in Figure 14, hydrogel chambers
containing fragmented antisense RNA (aRNA) when
probed with complementary Cy5 labeled RNA showed
fluorescence intensities approximately eight-fold greater than controls (unloaded chambers). Probing the RNA
loaded chambers with noncomplementary Cy5 labeled
aRNA confirmed that nucleic acid complementarity was
required and that noncomplementary Cy5 labeled aRNA
was not trapped within the hydrogel chambers. We
extended this work to assessing small DNA strands—a
common screening platform. A 20-mer DNA (50-
TGAGTCTTCTAAGCTCTCCG-30) was printed in the
hydrogel and probed with its Cy5 labeled compliment
(50-Cy5-CGGAGAGCTTAGAAGACTCA-30). After
hybridization, a five-fold increase in red fluorescence
was observed for hydrogel chambers containing the
duplex DNA. Probing the 20-mer with noncomplemen-
tary Cy5-DNA afforded no increase in fluorescence indi-
cating that hybridization had not occurred.
This facile and robotic screening platform using
hydrogel reaction chambers comprised of dendritic mac-
romers offers several advantages over conventional
screening methods and formats. These benefits include
(1) each hydrogel chamber acts as a site-isolated cham-
ber for a specific reaction; (2) the printing and formation
of the chamber occurs simultaneously with the loading
of the (bio)molecule or (bio)macromolecule of interest;
(3) a single platform for all molecular recognition proc-
esses from small molecules to proteins and nucleic
acids; (4) the monitoring of the molecular recognition
events can be achieved in an unbiased facile manner
without modification or chemical attachment of the enti-ties prior to use; and (5) the hydrogel chambers are ame-
nable to the preparation of large arrays for high through-
put screening.
CONCLUSIONS
In summary, dendritic macromers are versatile macro-
molecules for the preparation of hydrogels which are of
interest and utility for a variety of applications. Herein
we described three successful applications using these
macromers and, importantly, each requiring a different
set of design requirements—be it a corneal sealant, ascaffold for cartilage tissue engineering, or a reaction
chamber for screening molecular recognition events. An
underlying theme to this research is the synthesis and
use of dendritic macromolecules that are biodegradable
and biocompatible. For our interests, the syntheses,
whether divergent or convergent, require selection of a
monomer that is known to be biocompatible or degrad-
able in vivo to natural metabolites and high reaction
yields to attain material for subsequent evaluation. Den-
dritic macromolecules are favored in our laboratory over
linear polymers because of the high level of molecular
control that can be achieved during synthesis affording
unique, well-defined macromolecules. This result hastwo significant consequences. First it enables a specific
physical property, mechanical property, or biological
response to be correlated to a well-defined macromolec-
ular composition. Second, it facilitates the designing and
prototyping of a macromolecule for a specific applica-
tion.
With regards to the resulting crosslinked hydrogels
formed from these macromers, there are a number of im-
portant points to learn. First, we can use two different
types of crosslinking chemistries to prepare the hydro-
gels. The photochemical route allows facile \on
demand" crosslinking by application of light and is
adaptable to endoscope-assisted microsurgery. Prior to
crosslinking, the aqueous solution of the macromer can
be applied to the tissue site including those sites that are
difficult to reach or are of irregular size and shape—like
many trauma sites. The electrophile–nucleophile based
crosslinking strategies, which begin to crosslink upon
mixing and then set upon placement on the tissue, do not
require additional instrumentation (such as a laser) for
use but do require careful timing and placement on the
surface. This is true for both the Schiff-base and chemi-
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
396 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 15/18
cal ligation chemistry. The chemical ligation strategy is
beneficial since the reaction is performed at neutral pH,
occurs quickly, produces no by-products, and is chemo-
selective. We have investigated both the formation of
thiozolidine and pseudoproline linkages for creating
these hydrogels. These two reactions demonstrate theconcept of using chemical reversibility as a means to
control hydrogel performance lifetimes. The formation
of the thiozolidine is a reversible reaction and thus the
hydrogels prepared using this linkage have limited sta-
bility in water of about a week whereas those hydrogels
prepared with pseudoproline linkages, which involves
an irreversible reaction, remain stable for months. This
difference can be tailored for a specific application as
we have shown for sealing corneal lacerations or secur-
ing corneal transplants.
Using either hydrogel formation strategy, we can vary
the physical and mechanical properties of the resulting
hydrogels. For example, by varying the weight percentor the dendritic structure, the mechanical properties of
the hydrogels can be tuned. We have prepared hydrogels
with a compressive modulus ranging from approxi-
mately 10–900 kPa. Likewise, degradation can be modu-
lated by selecting different linkage chemistries within
the dendrimer structure (e.g., ester vs. amide vs. thiozoli-
dine vs. carbamate). The highly branched structure of
the dendritic macromolecule, which possesses a multi-
tude of crosslinkable groups, allows for efficient cross-
linking and formation of hydrogels with low swelling
characteristics. This is advantageous as excessive swel-
ling can lead to dislodgement of the hydrogel from the
site and/or negate the tissue sealing effect by increasingthe distance between adjacent structures. The hydrogels
can be formed on tissue surfaces and synthetic surfaces
such as glass. In fact, many individual hydrogels can be
prepared on a surface to create arrays for high through-
put screening. Small molecules, proteins, nucleic acids,
and cells can be entrapped within the hydrogels and once
entrapped do not lose their function. Moreover, we have
prepared hydrogels using a wide range of polymer wt %
such that we can form hydrogels that possess from 40 to
93% water by weight. In general, we find hydrogels pos-
sessing such high water weight percents to be biocom-
patible and more suitable for working with biologics
(e.g., tissues, cells, proteins).
These well-defined dendritic macromolecules offer a
wealth of opportunities to control structure and tune
properties. Our studies have enabled a basic understand-
ing of the relationships between composition, structure,
and properties as well as what design requirements are
required for a specific application. It is a chemist’s tool-
box. We can alter composition, crosslinking chemistry,
internal bonds, wt %, adhesivity, generation number and
all of these effects afford diverse macroscopic results.
Continued investigation and development of these den-
dritic macromolecules as well as other biocompatible
compositions and unique architectures will increase our
basic understandings and provide new solutions to
chemical, biological, and medical challenges in the com-
ing decades.
This work was supported in part by the NIH, PEW
Foundation, and BU. The author thanks his collabo-
rators Terry Kim (Duke Eye Center), Brian Snyder
(Children’s Hospital/Harvard Medical School), Lori
Setton (Duke University), Scott Schaus (Boston Uni-
versity) and their fellows and students who worked
on these projects. The author also thanks his gradu-
ate students and postdoctoral fellows for their hard
work and dedication to these projects: Prashant N.
Bansal, Jason Berlin, Michael A. Carnahan, Lovorka
Degoricija, Neel Joshi, Nathanael R. Luman, Steven
R, Meyers, Merredith Morgan, Abigal Oelker, Kim-
berly A. Smeds, Serge H. M. Sontjens, and Michel
Wathier.
REFERENCES AND NOTES
1. Lee, C. C.; MacKay, J. A.; Frechet, J. M. J.;
Szoka, F. C. Nat Biotech 2005, 23, 1517.
2. Svenson, S.; Tomalia, D. A. Adv Drug Deliv Rev
2005, 57, 2106.
3. Gillies, E. R.; Frechet, J. M. J. Drug Discov
Today 2005, 10, 35.
4. Lee, C. C.; Gillies, E. R.; Fox, M. E.; Guillaudeu,
S. J.; Frechet, J. M. J.; Dy, E. E.; Szoka, F. C.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2006, 103, 16649.5. Liu, M.; Frechet, M. J. Pharm Sci Technol Today
1999, 2, 393.
6. Konda, S. D.; Aref, M.; Wang, S.; Brechbiel, M.;
Wiener, E. C. MAGMA 2001, 12, 104.
7. Kobayashi, H.; Sato, N.; Hiraga, A.; Saga, T.;
Nakamoto, Y.; Ueda, H.; Konishi, J.; Togashi,
K.; Brechbiel, M. W. Magn Reson Med 2001, 45,
454.
8. Chen, C. Z.; Beck-Tan, N. C.; Dhurjati, P.; van
Dyk, T. K.; LaRossa, R. A.; Cooper, S. L. Bioma-
cromolecules 2000, 1, 473.
9. Tang, M. X.; Redemann, C. T.; Szoka, F. C., Jr.
Bioconjug Chem 1996, 7, 703.
10. Kukowska-Latallo, J. F.; Chen, C. L.; Eichman,J.; Bielinska, A. U.; Baker, J. R. Biochem Bio-
phys Res Commun 1999, 264, 253.
11. Quintana, A.; Raczka, E.; Piehler, L.; Lee, I.; Myc,
A.; Majoros, I.; Patri, A. K.; Thomas, T.; Mule, J.;
Baker, J. R. J. Pharm Res 2002, 19, 1310.
12. Patri, A. K.; Majoros, I. J.; Baker, J. R. Curr
Opin Chem Biol 2002, 6, 466.
13. Carnahan, M. A.; Middleton, C.; Kim, J.; Kim,
T.; Grinstaff, M. W. J Am Chem Soc 2002, 124,
5291.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 397
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 16/18
14. Morgan, M. T.; Nakanishi, Y.; Kroll, D. J.; Gri-
set, A. P.; Carnahan, M. A.; Wathier, M.; Ober-
lies, N. H.; Manikumar, G.; Wani, M. C.; Grin-
staff, M. W. Cancer Res 2006, 66, 11913.
15. Bielinska, A. U.; Chen, C.; Johnson, J.; Baker,
J. R., Jr. Bioconjug Chem 1999, 10, 843.
16. Grinstaff, M. W. Chem Eur J 2002, 8, 2838–2846.
17. Frechet, J. M. J. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2002,
99, 4782.
18. Fischer, M.; Vogtle, F. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl
1999, 38, 884.
19. Bosman, A. W.; Janssen, H. M.; Meijer, E. W.
Chem Rev 1999, 99, 1665.
20. Zeng, F.; Zimmerman, S. C. Chem Rev 1997, 97,
1681.
21. Mathews, O. A.; Shipway, A. N.; Stoddart, J. F.
Prog Polym Sci 1998, 23, 1.
22. Newkome, G. R.; Moorefield, C. N.; Keith, J. N.;
Baker, G. R.; Escamilla, G. H. Angew Chem Int
Ed Engl 1994, 33, 666.23. Newkome, G. R.; Moorefield, C. N.; Vogtle, F.
Dendritic Molecules: Concepts, Syntheses, Per-
spectives; VCH: New York, 1996.
24. Tomalia, D. A.; Frechet, J. M. J. J Polym Sci
Part A: Polym Chem 2002, 40, 2719.
25. Hawker, C. J; Frechet, J. M. J Am Chem Soc
1990, 112, 7638.
26. Tomalia, D. A.; Naylor, A. M.; Goddard, W. A.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 1990, 29, 138.
27. Balagurusamy, V. S. K.; Ungar, G.; Percec, V.;
Johansson, G. J Am Chem Soc 1997, 119, 1539.
28. Percec, V.; Cho, W. D.; Mosier, P. E.; Ungar, G.;
Yeardley, D. J. P. J Am Chem Soc 1998, 120, 11061.
29. Percec, V.; Cho, W. D.; Ungar, G.; Yeardley, D. J.P. J Am Chem Soc 2001, 123, 1302.
30. Gorman, C. B.; Smith, J. C. Acc Chem Res 2001,
34, 60.
31. Newkome, G. R.; Yao, Z.; Baker, G. R.; Gupta, V.
K. J Org Chem 1985, 50, 2003.
32. Tomalia, D. A.; Baker, H.; Deward, J.; Hall, M.;
Kallos, G.; Martin, S.; Reck, J.; Ryder, J.; Smith,
P. Polym J 1985, 17, 117.
33. Ihre, H.; De Jesus, O. L. P.; Frechet, J. M. J.
J Am Chem Soc 2001, 123, 5908.
34. Lambrych, K. R.; Gitsov, I. Macromolecules
2003, 36, 1068.
35. Tomalia, D. A.; Baker, H.; Dewald, J.; Hall, M.;
Kallos, G.; Martin, S.; Roeck, J.; Ryder, J.;Smith, P. Macromolecules 1986, 19, 2466.
36. Buhleier, W.; Wehner, F. V.; Vogtle, F. Synthesis
1978, 155.
37. Worner, C.; Mulhaupt, R. Angew Chem Int Ed
Engl 1993, 32, 1306.
38. Van den Berg, D. B.; Meijer, E. W. Angew Chem
Int Ed Engl 1993, 32, 1308.
39. Bharathi, P.; Patel, U.; Kawaguchi, T.; Pesak,
D.J.; Moore, J.S. Macromolecules 1995, 28,
5955.
40. Ihre, H.; Hult, A.; Frechet, J. M. J. Macromole-
cules 1998, 31, 4061.
41. Hawker, C. J.; Frechet, J. M. J. J Chem Soc
Chem Commun 1990, 1010.
42. Zhang, W.; Nowlan, D. T.; Thomson, L. M.;
Lackowski, W. M.; Simanek, E. E. J Am Chem
Soc 2001, 123, 8914.43. Jayaraman, M.; Frechet, J. M. J. J Am Chem
Soc 1998, 120, 12996.
44. Grayson, S. M.; Jayaraman, M.; Frechet, J. M.
J. Chem Commun 1999, 1329.
45. Grayson, S. M.; Frechet, J. M. J. J Am Chem
Soc 2000, 122, 10335.
46. Wu, P.; Feldman, A. K.; Nugent, A. K.; Hawker,
C. J.; Scheel, A.; Voit, B.; Pyun, J.; Frechet, J.
M. J.; Sharpless, K. B.; Fokin, V. V. Angew
Chem Int Ed Engl 2004, 43.
47. Carnahan, M. A.; Grinstaff, M. W. J Am Chem
Soc 2001, 123, 2905.
48. Carnahan, M. A.; Grinstaff, M. W. Macromole-
cules 2001, 34, 7648.49. Morgan, M. T.; Carnahan, M. A.; Immoos, C. E.;
Ribeiro, A. A.; Finkelstein, S.; Lee, S. J.; Grin-
staff, M. W. J Am Chem Soc 2003, 125, 15485.
50. Carnahan, M. A.; Grinstaff, M. W. Macromole-
cules 2006, 39, 609.
51. Degoricija, L.; Carnahan, M. A.; Johnson, C. S.;
Kim, T.; Grinstaff, M. W. Macromolecules 2006,
39, 8952.
52. Luman, N. R.; Smeds, K. A.; Grinstaff, M. W.
Chem Eur J 2003, 9, 5618.
53. Luman, N. R.; Grinstaff, M. W. Org Lett 2005,
7, 4863.
54. Luman, N. R.; Kim, T.; Grinstaff, M. W. Pure
Appl Chem 2004, 76, 1375.55. Wathier, M.; Jung, P. J.; Carnahan, M. A.; Kim, T.;
Grinstaff, M. W. J Am Chem Soc 2004, 126, 12744.
56. Wathier, M.; Johnson, S. M.; Kim, T.; Grinstaff,
M. W. Bioconjug Chem 2006, 17, 873.
57. Wathier, M.; Johnson, M. S.; Carnahan, M. A.;
Baer, C.; McCuen, B. M.; Kim, T.; Grinstaff, M.
W. ChemMedChem 2006, 1, 821.
58. Hubbell, J. A. Mater Res Soc Bull 1996, 21, 33.
59. Elisseeff, J.; Anseth, K.; Sims, D.; McIntosh, W.;
Randolph, M.; Langer, R. Proc Natl Acad Sci
USA 1999, 96, 3104.
60. Smeds, K.; Pfister-Serres, A.; Miki, D.; Dast-
ghieb, K. A.; Inoue, M.; Hatchell, D. L.; Grin-
staff, M. W. J Biomed Mater Res 2001, 54, 115.61. Miki, D.; Pfister-Serres, A.; Dastghieb, K. A.;
Smeds, K. A.; Inoue, M.; Hatchell, D. L.; Grin-
staff, M. W. Cornea 2002, 21, 393.
62. Nettles, D. L.; Vail, T. P.; Morgan, M. T.; Grin-
staff, M. W.; Setton, L. A. Ann Biomed Eng
2004, 32, 391.
63. Lynman, M. D.; Melanson, D.; Sawhney, A. S.
Biomaterials 1996, 17, 359.
64. Pathak, C. P.; Sawhney, A. S.; Hubbell, J. A.
J Am Chem Soc 1992, 114, 8311.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
398 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 17/18
65. Sontjens, S.; Nettles, D. L.; Carnahan, M. A.;
Setton, L. A.; Grinstaff, M. W. Biomacromole-
cules 2006, 7, 310.
66. Liu, C. F.; Tam, J. P. J Am Chem Soc 1994, 116,
4149.
67. Tam, J. P.; Miao, Z. J Am Chem Soc 1999, 121,
9013.68. Liu, C. F.; Rao, C.; Tam, J. A. J Am Chem Soc
1996, 118, 307.
69. Tam, J. P.; Xu, J.; Eom, K. D. Biopolymers 2001,
60, 194.
70. Dawson, P. E.; Muir, T. W.; Clark-Lewis, I.;
Kent, S. B. H. Science 1994, 266, 766.
71. Nirankari, V. S.; Karesh, J. W.; Richards, R. D.
Am J Ophthalmol 1983, 95, 515.
72. Shahinian, L. J.; Brown, S. I. Am J Ophthalmol
1977, 83, 546.
73. Varley, G. A.; Meisler, D. M. Refract Corneal
Surg 1991, 7, 62.
74. Binder, P. S. Ophthalmology 1985, 92, 1412.
75. Webster, R. G.; Slansky, H. H.; Refojo, M. M.;Boruchoff, S. A.; Dohlman, C. H. Arch Ophthal-
mol 1968, 80, 705.
76. Hyndiuk, R. A.; Hull, D. S.; Kinyoun, J. L. Oph-
thalmic Surg 1974, 5, 50.
77. Weiss, J. L.; Williams, P.; Lindstrom, R. L.;
Doughman, D. J. Ophthalmology 1983, 90, 610.
78. Leahey, A. B.; Gottsch, J. D.; Stark, W. J. Oph-
thalmology 1993, 100, 173.
79. Carlson, A. N.; Wilhelmus, K. R. Am J Ophthal-
mol 1987, 104, 437.
80. Hida, T.; Sheta, S. M.; Proia, A. D.; McCuen,
B. W. Retina 1988, 8, 148.
81. Seelenfreund, M. H.; Refojo, M. F.; Schepens, C.
L. Arch Ophthalmol 1970, 83, 619.82. Girard, L. J.; Cobb, S.; Reed, T.; Williams, B.;
Minaya, J. Ann Ophthalmol 1969, 1, 65.
83. Siegal, J. E.; Zaidman, G. W. Ophthalmic Surg
1989, 20, 179.
84. Honig, M. A.; Rapuano, C. J. In Cornea;
Krachmer, J. H.; Mannis, M. J.; Holland, E. J.,
Eds.; Mosby: St. Louis, MO, 1997; Vol. 3, pp 1815.
85. Velazquez, A. J.; Carnahan, M. A.; Kristinsson,
J.; Stinnett, S.; Grinstaff, M. W.; Kim, T. Arch
Ophthalmol 2004, 122, 867.
86. Degoricija, L.; Johnson, C. S.; Wathier, M.; Kim,
T.; Grinstaff, M. W. Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci
2007, 48.
87. Kang, C.; Carnahan, M. A.; Wathier, M.; Grin-staff, M. W.; Kim, T. J Cataract Refract Surg
2005, 31, 1208.
88. NIH. NIH Eye Institute, 2004.
89. Volker-Dieben, H. J. M.; Kok-Van Alphen, C. C.;
Lansbergen, Q.; Persijn, G. G. Acta Ophthalmol
1982, 60, 190.
90. Paque, J.; Poirier, R. H. Ophthalmic Surg 1977,
8, 71.
91. Wilson, S. E.; Kaufman, H. E. Surv Ophthalmol
1990, 34, 325.
92. Khodadoust, A. A. The Allgraft Rejection Reac-
tion: The Leading Cause of Late Failure of Clin-
ical Corneal Grafts; Elsevier Scientific: 1973; pp
151–164.
93. Johnson, C. S.; Wathier, M.; Grinstaff, M. W.;
Kim, T, submitted for publication.
94. Hunziker, E. B. Osteoarthr Cartil 2002, 10, 432.95. Mow, V. C.; Ratcliffe, A. Structure and Function
of Articular Cartilage and Meniscus, 2nd ed.;
Lippincott Raven: Philadelphia, 1997.
96. Howell, D. S. Am J Med 1986, 80, 24.
97. Goldring, M. B. Arthritis Rheum 2000, 43, 1916.
98. Lee, P.; Rooney, P.; Sturrock, R.; Kennedy, A.;
Dick, W. Semin Arthritis Rheum 1974, 3, 189.
99. Simon, L. Clin Cornerstone 1999, 2, 26.
100. Felson, D. Rheum Dis Clin North Am 1993, 19,
607.
101. Akizuki, S.; Yasukawa, Y.; Takizawa, T. Arthro-
scopy 1997, 13, 9.
102. Belvins, F. T.; Steadman, J. R.; Rodrigo, J. J.;
Silliman, J. Orthopedics 1998, 21, 761.103. Ghivizzsani, S. C.; Oligino, T. J.; Robbins, P. D.;
Evans, C. N. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am
2000, 11, 289.
104. Brittberg, M.; Lindahl, A.; Nilsson, A.; Ohlsson,
C.; Isaksson, O.; Peterson, L. N Engl J Med
1994, 331, 889.
105. Buckwalter, J. A.; Mankin, H. J. Arthritis
Rheum 1998, 41, 1331.
106. Richardson, J. B.; Caterson, B.; Evans, E. H.;
Ashton, B. A.; Roberts, S. J Bone Joint Surg Br
1999, 81, 1064.
107. Moskowitz, R. W.; Howell, D. S.; Goldberg, V.
M.; Mankin, H. J. Osteoarthritis—Diagnosis
and Management; Saunders Company: Philadel-phia, 1984.
108. Temenoff, J. S.; Mikos, A. G. Biomaterials 2000,
21, 431.
109. Freed, L. E.; Guilak, F.; Guo, X. E.; Gray, M. L.;
Tranquillo, R.; Holmes, J. W.; Radisic, M.; Sef-
ton, M. V.; Kaplan, D.; Vunjak-Novakovic, G.
Tissue Eng 2006, 12, 3285.
110. Schaefer, D.; Martin, I.; Jundt, G.; Seidel, J.;
Heberer, M.; Grodzinsky, A.; Bergin, I.; Vunjak-
Novakovic, G.; Freed, L. E. Arthritis Rheum
2002, 46, 2524.
111. Grande, D. A.; Breitbart, A. S.; Mason, J.; Pau-
lino, C.; Laser, J.; Schwartz, R. E. Clin Orthop
Relat Res 1999, 367S, S176.112. Elisseeff, J.; Anseth, K.; Sims, D.; McIntosh, W.;
Randolph, M. A.; Yaremchuk, M.; Langer, R.
Plast Reconstr Surg 1999, 104, 1014.
113. Anseth, K. S.; Metters, A. T.; Bryant, S. J.;
Martens, P. J.; Elisseeff, J. H.; Bowman, C. N. J
Controlled Release 2002, 78, 199.
114. Bryant, S. J.; Anseth, K. S. J Biomed Mater Res
2003, 64, 70.
115. Martens, P. J.; Bryant, S. J.; Anseth, K. S. Bio-
macromolecules 2003, 4, 283.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
HIGHLIGHT 399
8/3/2019 Mark W. Grinstaff- Dendritic Macromers for Hydrogel Formation: Tailored Materials for Ophthalmic, Orthopedic, and …
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/mark-w-grinstaff-dendritic-macromers-for-hydrogel-formation-tailored-materials 18/18
116. Halstenberg, S.; Panitch, A.; Rizzi, S.; Hall,
H.; Hubbell, J. A. Biomacromolecules 2002, 3,
710.
117. Degoricija, L.; Sontjens, S. H. M.; Bansal, P. N.;
Takahashi, M.; Joshi, N.; Snyder, B.; Grinstaff,
M. W, submitted for publication.
118. Abbott, A. Nature 1999, 402, 715.119. Schena, M.; Shalon, D.; Davis, R. W.; Brown, P.
O. Science 1995, 270, 467.
120. Schena, M.; Heller, R. A.; Theriault, T. P.; Kon-
rad, K.; Lachenmeier, E.; Davis, R. W. Trends
Biotech 1998, 16, 301.
121. Gerold, D.; Rushmore, T.; Caskey, C. T. Trends
Biochem Sci 1999, 24, 168.
122. Sparks, A. B.; Hoffman, N. G.; McConnell, S. J.;
Fowlkes, D. M.; Kay, B. K. Nat Biotechnol 1996,
14, 741.
123. MacBeath, G. Nat Genet 2002, 32, 526.
124. Hoever, M.; Zbinden, P. Drug Discov Today
2004, 9, 358.
125. Vaschetto, M.; Weissbrod, T.; Bodle, D.; Guner,O. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel 2003, 6, 377.
126. Min, D. H.; Mrksich, M. Curr Opin Chem Biol
2004, 8, 554.
127. Rondelez, Y.; Tresset, G.; Tabata, K. V.; Arata,
H.; Fujita, H.; Takeuchi, S.; Noji, H. Nat Bio-
technol 2005, 23, 361.
128. Watzke, A.; Khn, M.; Gutierrez-Rodriguez, M.;
Wacker, R.; Schrder, H.; Breinbauer, R.; Kuhl-
mann, J.; Alexandrov, K.; Niemeyer, C. M.;
Goody, R. S.; Waldmann, H. Angew Chem Int
Ed Engl 2006, 45, 1408.
129. Tomizaki, K.; Usui, K.; Mihara, H. ChemBio-
Chem 2005, 6, 782.
130. Zhang, K.; Diehl, M. R.; Tirrell, D. A., J AmChem Soc 2005, 127, 10136.
131. Zhao, Z.; Banerjee, I. A.; Matsui, H. J Am Chem
Soc 2005, 127, 8930.
132. Gong, P.; Grainger, D. W. Surf Sci 2004, 570,
67.
133. Hoff, A.; Andre, T.; Schaffer, T. E.; Jung, G.;
Wiesmuller, K. H.; Brock, R. ChemBioChem
2002, 3, 1183.
134. Li, L. S.; Stupp, S. I. Macromolecules 1997, 30, 2110.
135. Singhvi, R.; Kumar, A.; Lopez, G. P.; Stephano-
poulos, G. N.; Wang, D. I. C.; Whitesides, G. M.;
Ingber, D. E. Science 1994, 264, 696.136. Ito, Y.; Nogawa, M. Biomaterials 2003, 24, 3021.
137. Orner, B. P.; Derda, R.; Lewis, R. L.; Thomson,
J. A.; Kiessling, L. L. J Am Chem Soc 2004,
126, 10808.
138. Falsey, J. R.; Renil, M.; Park, S.; Li, S.; Lam, K.
S. Bioconjug Chem 2001, 12, 346.
139. MacBeath, G.; Koehler, A. N.; Schreiber, S. L.
J Am Chem Soc 1999, 121, 7967.
140. MacBeath, G.; Schreiber, S. L. Science 2000, 289,
1760.
141. Harris, R. F.; Nation, A. J.; Copeland, G. T.;
Miller, S. J. J Am Chem Soc 2000, 122, 11270.
142. Yousaf, M. N.; Houseman, B. T.; Mrksich, M.
Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2000, 98, 5992.143. Ziauddin, J.; Sabatini, D. M.; Nature 2001, 411,
107.
144. Silva, J; Mizuno, H.; Brady, A.; Lucito, R.; Hannon,
G. J. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2004, 101, 6548.
145. Hong, Y.; Webb, B. L.; Su, H.; Mozdy, E. J.;
Fang, Y.; Wu, Q.; Liu, L.; Beck, J.; Ferrie, A. M.;
Raghaven, S; Mauro, B.; Carre, A.; Mueller, D.;
Lai, F.; Rasnow, B.; Johnson, M.; Min, H.; Salon,
J.; Lohiri, J. J Am Chem Soc 2005, 127, 15350.
146. Afanassiev, V.; Hanemann, V.; Wolf, S. Nucleic
Acids Res 2000, 28, e66.
147. Kanoh, N.; Kumashiro, S.; Simizu, S.; Kondoh,
Y.; Hatakeyama, S.; Tashiro, H.; Osada, H.
Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2003, 42, 5584.148. Kanoh, N.; Honda, K.; Simizu, S.; Muroi, M.;
Osada, H. Angew Chem Int Ed Engl 2005, 44,
3559.
149. Dominguez, M. M.; Wathier, M.; Grinstaff, M.
W.; Schaus, S. E. Anal Chem 2007, 79, 1064.
Journal of Polymer Science: Part A: Polymer ChemistryDOI 10.1002/pola
400 J. POLYM. SCI. PART A: POLYM. CHEM.: VOL. 46 (2008)