Back

Exploring lipid nanoparticle design spaces using self-regulating microfluidic machines and multiplexed in vivo biodistribution

Kehrein, J.; Reus, E.; Holick, C. T.; Mummel, S.; Ates, I.; Hafke, M.; Käsbach, J.; Weber, C.; Lühmann, T.; Schubert, S.; Magnus, J.; Mann, F. A.; Schubert, U. S.; Meinel, L.

2026-06-08 bioengineering
10.64898/2026.06.03.729611 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Delivering therapeutic mRNA relies on lipid nanoparticles (LNPs). Finding optimal process parameters for new lipid combinations in LNP formulations remains a challenge. In our work, we used an automated, self-regulating microfluidic platform that actively changes process parameters to tune LNP formulations for preset, desired quality standards. We tested new LNPs by swapping poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) lipopolymers for alternatives based on poly(2-methyl-2-oxazoline) (PMeOx) and poly(2-ethyl-2-oxazoline) (PEtOx). For each lipopolymer variant, the platform independently identified optimal production conditions in four or fewer iterative cycles, yielding particles of the preset size and high mRNA encapsulation. Small-angle X-ray scattering revealed that smaller LNPs modified with PEtOx had more structural surface variety and higher mRNA loading efficiency. When multiplexing these formulations in mice, the PEtOx-containing LNPs accumulated more in bone marrow compared to those with PEG, indicating trends that the chemistry of the lipopolymer affects the biodistribution of the resulting LNPs. By combining automated formulation and in vivo multiplexed testing, our approach provides a practical way to rapidly plan, formulate, and evaluate large pharmaceutical design spaces, to select excipients and process parameters yielding optimal biological performance of LNPs. O_FIG O_LINKSMALLFIG WIDTH=200 HEIGHT=76 SRC="FIGDIR/small/729611v1_ufig1.gif" ALT="Figure 1"> View larger version (25K): org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@169ebb5org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@f1d899org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@1c34725org.highwire.dtl.DTLVardef@173d845_HPS_FORMAT_FIGEXP M_FIG C_FIG

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.