Graphene is the newest member of the carbon family, and has revolutionized materials science especially in the field of polymer nanocomposites. However, agglomeration and uniform dispersion remains an Achilles' heel (even an elephant in the room), hampering the optimization of this material for practical applications. Chemical functionalization of graphene can overcome these hurdles but is often rather disruptive to the extended pi-conjugation, altering the desired physical and electronic properties. Employing surfactants as stabilizing agents in latex technology circumvents the need for chemical modification allowing for the formation of nanocomposites with retained graphene properties. This article reviews the recent progress in the use of surfactants and polymers to prepare graphene/polymer nanocomposites via latex technology. Of special interest here are surfactant structure-performance relationships, as well as background on the roles surfactant-graphene interactions for promoting stabilization.
Here is presented a systematic study of the dispersibility of multiwall carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) in natural rubber latex (NR-latex) assisted by a series of single-, double-, and triple-sulfosuccinate anionic surfactants containing phenyl ring moieties. Optical polarising microscopy, field emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM), and Raman spectroscopy have been performed to obtain the dispersion-level profiles of the MWCNTs in the nanocomposites. Interestingly, a triple-chain, phenyl-containing surfactant, namely sodium 1,5-dioxo-1,5-bis(3-phenylpropoxy)-3-((3-phenylpropoxy)carbonyl) pentane-2-sulfonate (TCPh), has a greater capacity the stabilisation of MWCNTs than a commercially available single-chain sodium dodecylbenzenesulfonate (SDBS) surfactant. TCPh provides significant enhancements in the electrical conductivity of nanocomposites, up to ∼10(-2) S cm(-1), as measured by a four-point probe instrument. These results have allowed compilation of a road map for the design of surfactant architectures capable of providing the homogeneous dispersion of MWCNTs required for the next generation of polymer-carbon-nanotube materials, specifically those used in aerospace technology.
We previously identified autoantibodies to the endocytic-associated protein Huntingtin-interacting protein 1-related (HIP1R) in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients. HIP1R regulates internalization of cell surface receptors via endocytosis, a process relevant to many therapeutic strategies including CD20 targeting with rituximab. In this study, we characterized HIP1R expression patterns, investigated a mechanism of transcriptional regulation and its clinical relevance in DLBCL patients treated with immunochemotherapy (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone, R-CHOP). HIP1R was preferentially expressed in germinal center B-cell-like DLBCL (P<0.0001) and inversely correlated with the activated B-cell-like DLBCL (ABC-DLBCL) associated transcription factor, Forkhead box P1 (FOXP1). HIP1R was confirmed as a direct FOXP1 target gene in ABC-DLBCL by FOXP1-targeted silencing and chromatin immunoprecipitation. Lower HIP1R protein expression (≤ 10% tumoral positivity) significantly correlated with inferior overall survival (OS, P=0.0003) and progression-free survival (PFS, P=0.0148) in R-CHOP-treated DLBCL patients (n=157). Reciprocal expression with ≥ 70% FOXP1 positivity defined FOXP1(hi)/HIP1R(lo) patients with particularly poor outcome (OS, P=0.0001; PFS, P=0.0016). In an independent R-CHOP-treated DLBCL (n=233) microarray data set, patients with transcript expression in lower quartile HIP1R and FOXP1(hi)/HIP1R(lo) subgroups exhibited worse OS, P=0.0044 and P=0.0004, respectively. HIP1R repression by FOXP1 is strongly associated with poor outcome, thus further understanding of FOXP1-HIP1R and/or endocytic signaling pathways might give rise to novel therapeutic options for DLBCL.
The FOXP1 (forkhead box P1) transcription factor is a marker of poor prognosis in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). Here microarray analysis of FOXP1-silenced DLBCL cell lines identified differential regulation of immune response signatures and major histocompatibility complex class II (MHC II) genes as some of the most significant differences between germinal center B-cell (GCB)-like DLBCL with full-length FOXP1 protein expression versus activated B-cell (ABC)-like DLBCL expressing predominantly short FOXP1 isoforms. In an independent primary DLBCL microarray data set, multiple MHC II genes, including human leukocyte antigen DR alpha chain (HLA-DRA), were inversely correlated with FOXP1 transcript expression (P<0.05). FOXP1 knockdown in ABC-DLBCL cells led to increased cell-surface expression of HLA-DRA and CD74. In R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine and prednisone)-treated DLBCL patients (n=150), reduced HLA-DRA (<90% frequency) expression correlated with inferior overall survival (P=0.0003) and progression-free survival (P=0.0012) and with non-GCB subtype stratified by the Hans, Choi or Visco-Young algorithms (all P<0.01). In non-GCB DLBCL cases with <90% HLA-DRA, there was an inverse correlation with the frequency (P=0.0456) and intensity (P=0.0349) of FOXP1 expression. We propose that FOXP1 represents a novel regulator of genes targeted by the class II MHC transactivator CIITA (MHC II and CD74) and therapeutically targeting the FOXP1 pathway may improve antigen presentation and immune surveillance in high-risk DLBCL patients.
Is there a universal hierarchy of the senses, such that some senses (e.g., vision) are more accessible to consciousness and linguistic description than others (e.g., smell)? The long-standing presumption in Western thought has been that vision and audition are more objective than the other senses, serving as the basis of knowledge and understanding, whereas touch, taste, and smell are crude and of little value. This predicts that humans ought to be better at communicating about sight and hearing than the other senses, and decades of work based on English and related languages certainly suggests this is true. However, how well does this reflect the diversity of languages and communities worldwide? To test whether there is a universal hierarchy of the senses, stimuli from the five basic senses were used to elicit descriptions in 20 diverse languages, including 3 unrelated sign languages. We found that languages differ fundamentally in which sensory domains they linguistically code systematically, and how they do so. The tendency for better coding in some domains can be explained in part by cultural preoccupations. Although languages seem free to elaborate specific sensory domains, some general tendencies emerge: for example, with some exceptions, smell is poorly coded. The surprise is that, despite the gradual phylogenetic accumulation of the senses, and the imbalances in the neural tissue dedicated to them, no single hierarchy of the senses imposes itself upon language.