The plotted luciferase signal is higher for the DOPE formulation than the DSPC formulation. Exact numerical means and a statistical comparison are not printed.
Luciferase assay; mean with SEM; qualitative reading of the figure. · SI Fig. S3, p. S5sales@dcchemicals.com
Lipid CS22021
Formulation & Performance
Literature-reported formulation composition
| Component | Reported component ratio | Role |
|---|---|---|
| CS22021 | 49.25 | Ionizable lipid |
| DOPE | 49.25 | Helper phospholipid |
| M-DMG-PEG2K | 1.5 | PEG lipid |
| Reported ratio sum | 100 | Original ratio retained |
Formulation calculator unavailable. The SI prints the component ratio without defining its molar-versus-mass basis or the exact molecular weight of M-DMG-PEG2K. Confirm both before calculating component weights. Obtain and verify the complete composition and component molecular weights before planning component quantities.
Literature-reported performance for the cited formulation
Literature-reported83.13 nmSI Table S1: CS22021/DOPE/M-DMG-PEG2K formulationSI Table S1, p. S3; Luc-CS22021 in Table S2, p. S7
Literature-reported0.091SI Table S1: CS22021/DOPE/M-DMG-PEG2K formulationSI Table S1, p. S3; Table S2, p. S7
Literature-reported89%SI Table S1: CS22021/DOPE/M-DMG-PEG2K formulationSI Table S1, p. S3; Table S2, p. S7
Literature-reported-4.77 mVSI Table S1: CS22021/DOPE/M-DMG-PEG2K formulationSI Table S1, p. S3; Table S2, p. S7
Literature-reported5.804Formulated nanoparticles; not neat-lipid pKa · ALC-0315-based 4C-LNP: 6.267SI Fig. S6, p. S9
Helper-phospholipid comparison
| CS22021 / helper / M-DMG-PEG2K | N/P | Size (nm) | PDI | EE (%) | Zeta (mV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DSPC: 49.25 : 49.25 : 1.5 | 8 | 63.41 | 0.13 | 87 | +1.14 |
| DOPE: 49.25 : 49.25 : 1.5 | 8 | 83.13 | 0.091 | 89 | -4.77 |
SI Table S1, p. S3. Original ratios are retained. Neither variant includes added free cholesterol.
Cargo-specific LNP properties for animal studies
| SI sample name | Size (nm) | PDI | EE (%) | Zeta (mV) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Luc-CS22021 | 83.13 | 0.091 | 89 | -4.77 |
| Luc-ALC-0315 | 78.16 | 0.088 | 93 | -7.18 |
| gE-CS22021 | 102.6 | 0.096 | 97 | -7.94 |
| gE-ALC-0315 | 75.92 | 0.069 | 92 | -3.46 |
SI Table S2, p. S7. Values refer to the named LNP/cargo samples, not the supplied neat lipid. gE and luciferase results are kept separate.
Additional reported findings
CS22021 shows higher plotted luciferase signals in HeLa and A549, substantially lower signal in HEK293T, and similar signal in Hep3B relative to ALC-0315. This does not support a claim of universally superior transfection.
Mean with SEM; exact means are not digitized. The caption has HEK203T, whereas the graph labels HEK293T. · SI Fig. S4, p. S6Whole-animal imaging was performed at 6, 12 and 24 h; organs were imaged at 24 h. The plots show lower whole-animal and liver/spleen expression for CS22021 than ALC-0315 under this IV condition. This result does not establish IM injection-site localization.
5 micrograms mRNA/mouse; male BALB/c, 6-8 weeks; n=3; qualitative graph comparison. · SI Fig. S5, p. S8The indexed main-article abstract reports localized mRNA expression at the IM injection site, robust humoral and cellular responses to a VZV mRNA vaccine, and significantly higher CD8+ T-cell responses versus a conventional LNP. It provides no effect size or immunization schedule.
Abstract-level qualitative findings; cancer-vaccine use is proposed as a potential application, not demonstrated tumor efficacy in the available evidence. · Main-article abstract, PMID 40503610HEK293T CCK-8 viability is plotted near the control level under the tested conditions. Rat serum ALT/AST measurements are shown for days 18 and 24. The supplied SI lacks the full rat dosing regimen and a numerical statistical safety comparison; no clinical safety or no-toxicity claim is made.
SI Fig. S7: CCK-8 at 24 h after exposure. Fig. S9 illustrates a 0-4 muscle inflammation scoring scale, not treatment-group outcome scores. · SI Fig. S7, p. S10; Fig. S8, p. S11; Fig. S9, p. S12Literature Data DisclaimerAll formulation parameters and performance values shown in this section are derived from the cited publication and are provided for reference only. These results were obtained using the specific materials, formulation process, cargo, dose, analytical method, model and administration route described in that study. Unless otherwise stated, the data were not generated or independently verified by DC Chemicals. DC Chemicals supplies the lipid compound only and does not guarantee that customers will reproduce the reported LNP properties or biological performance.
The administration route shown above was used in the cited study and is not a clinical-use instruction or recommendation by DC Chemicals.
The administration route shown above was used in the cited study and is not a clinical-use instruction or recommendation by DC Chemicals.
Cited literature for this formulation and performance datasetWang Z, Yan Z, Yan S, et al. Ionizable Sterol Lipid-Based Three-Component Lipid Nanoparticles for Localized Delivery of mRNA Vaccine with Stronger Cellular Immune Responses. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces. 2025;17(25):36377-36386. DOI: 10.1021/acsami.5c04597
Numerical data: supplied 16-page SI, Tables S1-S2 and Figs. S5-S6. IM localization and immune-response claims: indexed abstract only. Full article methods were not accessible.
Numerical data: supplied 16-page SI, Tables S1-S2 and Figs. S5-S6. IM localization and immune-response claims: indexed abstract only. Full article methods were not accessible.