Joseph M DeSimone1, Sue J Mecham2, Crista L Farrell2. 1. Chemistry Department, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, United States; Chemical Engineering Department, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, North Carolina 27695, United States; Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, United States. 2. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina , Chapel Hill, North Carolina 27599, United States.
Abstract
This article was written to shed light on a series of what some have stated are not so obvious connections that link polymer synthesis in supercritical CO2 to cancer treatment and vaccines, nonflammable polymer electrolytes for lithium ion batteries, and 3D printing. In telling this story, we also attempt to show the value of versatility in applying one's primary area of expertise to address pertinent questions in science and in society. In this Outlook, we attempted to identify key factors to enable a versatile and nimble research effort to take shape in an effort to influence diverse fields and have a tangible impact in the private sector through the translation of discoveries into the marketplace.
This article was written to shed light on a series of what some have stated are not so obvious connections that link polymer synthesis in supercritical CO2 to cancer treatment and vaccines, nonflammable polymer electrolytes for lithium ion batteries, and 3D printing. In telling this story, we also attempt to show the value of versatility in applying one's primary area of expertise to address pertinent questions in science and in society. In this Outlook, we attempted to identify key factors to enable a versatile and nimble research effort to take shape in an effort to influence diverse fields and have a tangible impact in the private sector through the translation of discoveries into the marketplace.
To have a rapid, significant, and measurable
societal impact through
research, we have chosen to pursue the convergence of diverse fields
and ideas, as well as the translation of that research into commercial
processes and devices. Seeing connections among different disciplines,
designing studies (and entire research programs) around globally relevant
questions, conducting the right experiments, and capturing and reporting
the key data have been critical aspects of our research program. Convergence—a
problem-solving approach in research that emphasizes the integration
of knowledge, people, and ways of thinking from fields including the
life, physical, engineering, social, and behavioral sciences—can
thrive through the development and utilization of a collaborative
team of scientists and engineers with diverse backgrounds and experience.[1] Having gained traction in recent years in science
policy, this paradigm provides an exceptional opportunity for accelerating
scientific discovery in the context of identifying and addressing
the most pressing questions in modern society, including those related
to the environment, human health, and energy storage. Convergence
fosters real interactions and dialogue that bring about learning,
understanding, problem solving, and discoveries that would not be
possible within a single field of knowledge. Beyond discovery itself,
a vision for the realization of impactful discoveries must be developed
and communicated effectively to promote actions leading to commercialization.
This vision is key to our translation of scientific discoveries into
real-world solutions to address issues of the human condition. We
believe that relating our story will illuminate important lessons
about conducting convergent research in academia and having the ability
to successfully translate that research to industry.
Where To Play and How To
Win
Research is defined by
the Merriam-Webster dictionary as, “investigation or experimentation
aimed at the discovery and interpretation of facts, revision of accepted
theories or laws in the light of new facts, or practical application
of such new or revised theories or laws”. More poetically,
Henry Rosovsky, former Dean of the Faculty of Arts and Sciences at
Harvard, is quoted as saying, “Research is an expression of
faith in the possibility of progress. The drive that leads scholars
to study a topic has to include the belief that new things can be
discovered, that newer can be better, and that greater depth of understanding
is achievable. Research, especially academic research, is a form of
optimism about the human condition.”[2] Scientists embody that optimism when they apply their expertise
to explore their specialized fields more deeply or use new techniques
to investigate old ideas or unexplained phenomena in a given discipline.
Equally important is the exciting, innovative research that takes
place in the space between disciplines, where different fields converge
to address questions that demand the application of expertise from
more than one discipline. These fertile areas provide some of the
greatest opportunities for real-world application and impact. Using
our case as an example, material science can be applied to develop
or, in the context of novel processes, to solve problems in medicine,
environmental science, energy, or mechanical engineering, providing
some of the greatest opportunities for real-world application and
impact.The reality is that research requires funding, which
typically requires more than optimism to obtain and maintain. Traditional
government funding, in particular, is awarded based on a peer review
process, meaning that the proposed research is expected to be based
on established knowledge and beliefs. This approach is most likely
to result in incremental changes to a research topic or small expansions
of the knowledge base. The awarded funds are restricted to the proposed
research and allocated for specific purposes. In Peter Thiel’s
recent book, Zero to one: Notes on Startups, or How to Build
the Future, he frames breakthrough ideas as zero-to-one ideas
and incremental ideas as one-to-n ideas.[3] His thesis in the book is that a truly innovative,
zero-to-one idea is often associated with a core belief that an inventor
has that no one else has. This is exciting and alarming at the same
time, especially for academic researchers, since the primary mechanism
for funding research is the peer review system which requires one’s
peers to agree with you in order to get funding. Given this reality,
researchers pursuing such zero-to-one ideas will need financial support
that is not of the standard peer review type. Such alternative funding
could include endowed professorships, certain unrestricted federal
funds like the NIH Director’s Pioneer Award, and the ability
to work with the venture capital community doing translational research
or academic entrepreneurship.Pursuing translational research
is the most direct way for academic
researchers to improve the health, well-being, and economic vitality
of a society. For an academic scientist, entrepreneurship provides
a compass that helps to navigate where important problems are. It
also enables a scientist to benefit from peer review on steroids!
Certainly, peer review associated with publishing a paper makes papers
stronger. In analogy, it is our experience that the peer review associated
with financing one’s startup is likewise helpful in identifying
the key milestones and uncertainties of one’s research ideas,
thereby making the science better. In addition, this experience leads
to improved grantsmanship, as it forces one to articulate the differences
and benefits of one’s own science: the value proposition. Further,
the resources associated with company formation can provide an opportunity
for scale-up of critical technologies to allow the expansion of one’s
ideas in ways not possible otherwise. And finally, a key benefit of
academic entrepreneurship is that it intrinsically requires one’s
science to be valid: if it is not, mistakes will be identified quickly.
Convergence and Flexibility as a Mantra
It is ironic
that one of the few places where entropy is not at play is at universities!
Indeed, most academic institutions have entrenched divisions that
group like researchers together and isolate them from other types
of researchers. Nonetheless, communicating and collaborating with
researchers in fields other than one’s own can give rise to
new insights and perspectives that amplify the ability to join knowledge
from diverse fields to both identify and address important, societally
relevant research questions. Large multidisciplinary research centers,
such as government-funded science and technology centers, provide
excellent platforms for convergent research to lead to new discoveries,
and indeed, there has been significant momentum in recent years to
find ways to better support convergent research. Most recently, for
example, the National Science Foundation revealed an agenda, in the
form of nine “big ideas”, aimed at guiding the agency’s
approach to addressing urgent societal challenges in the coming decades;
“Growing Convergent Research at NSF” is among these
major priorities.[4] Turning to management,
having a team that can work together effectively within a large research
center requires excellent leadership and commitment for success. Providing
leadership that fosters relationships and interactions is a necessary
skill for a successful research director, especially in a convergence
framework. One advantage of large funded research centers is that
they can provide greater opportunity to leverage innovations within
the center and pivot from the original focus to a new focus within
a larger context area of research. The longer-term nature of centers
also allows for the development of continuity within a collaborative
group, where group members work together long enough and deeply enough
to learn extensively from one another, gain new expertise, and become
multilingual with respect to research topics. More informal opportunities
for collaboration can be found through participation in scientific
societies, government panels, and workshops. The best collaborations
are enabled through intentional actions that stretch one’s
comfort zone, where you adopt a vulnerable trust[5] and are clear about what you do not know, while learning
and communicating with others about what you do know.Successful
academic groups focused on translational research apply the findings
of fundamental science to the development of useful outcomes in society
and may include students and professionals in chemistry, engineering,
biology, physics, pharmacy, immunology, and others. A diverse group
of people working and sharing their research with one another enables
new understandings and problem-solving approaches. Fostering respect
and inclusion of diversity of all types, not only in experience and
educational background but also in identity—including race,
religion, gender, culture, nationality, sexual orientation, personality,
and socioeconomic background—encourages new ideas and approaches
that can blossom into unexpected and innovative discoveries.[6]
The Importance of a Supportive University
Home for Faculty
The University of North Carolina at Chapel
Hill and North Carolina
State University have formed an extremely supportive environment for
me and my research group over the past 25 years. We have had access
to an enabling infrastructure, leadership, and programs that have
helped us to become extremely proficient at translating research to
the private sector. This has included opportunities to partner with
multiple corporations over the years, something that required extra
administrative oversight by the university, which was not always easy
nor was it inexpensive. The university also enabled my students and
me to start several new companies based on our research. This helped
our research to reach a scale to truly impact society, but, even more
importantly, the close ties between these startup companies and my
academic lab allowed us to further our research in ways that would
not have been possible otherwise. One key example of this involved
Liquidia Technologies. Liquidia was formed based on a nano- and micromolding
technology developed at UNC-CH and NC State that we referred to as
PRINT (vide infra). As part of their corporate development
plans, Liquidia’s investors poured millions of dollars into
this technology to develop a process to make molds to form nano- and
microparticles. These molds were provided to my academic laboratory
in a form that could be run on a laboratory-scale roll-to-roll machine
at the university. This allowed us to make large quantities of particles
that we could not make otherwise. Such a capability enabled us to
ask new questions about the fate of particles in in vivo experiments, which triggered many preclinical animal studies that
would not have been possible otherwise.A key part of this translational
research environment was the ability of our university to file patent
applications. For academic research to lead to products, commercial
interests must get involved to provide the funds for scale-up and
market development. This translation of research requires a significant
investment, often in the range of hundreds of millions of dollars.
The return on this investment must have a high potential, and as such,
the filing of patent applications is often a necessary prerequisite.
Without it, commercial interests will never get involved. Continuing
this line of thinking, imagine a scenario where a faculty colleague
and her research group come up with a key breakthrough that could
lead to the cure of a dreaded disease like AIDS or a particular form
of cancer. If her university does not have the resources to file for
a patent application prior to her publication, then for all practical
purposes that publication will negate the attainment of a strong patent.
Without the potential for a strong patent to emerge, the ability to
garner the hundreds of millions of dollars necessary to convert that
breakthrough into a viable therapy is low. While a moral obligation
to publish and share seminal and/or key research results is often
argued, the commercial reality begs the question: does a university
have the moral obligation to have the resources necessary to file
a patent application too? Key patents, whether supported through the
university or developed outside of the university setting, must be
in place. Otherwise, groundbreaking research may never make it outside
the laboratory to become game-changing, widely available technology.
Results and Discussion
Our group has focused on synthetic
organic polymer chemistry integrated
with novel processes. We have built and maintained a group that is
multidisciplinary and diverse to encourage innovation in and among
convergent disciplines and that has respect for individuals in an
environment where people can collaborate, impart unique expertise,
and challenge one another to look at problems from different perspectives.
Having the courage to learn new things and perform research in new
areas to us has been most effective through collaborations.
One Thing Led
to Another, Which Led to Another...
We
began our research in 1990 with the focus of performing free radical
polymerizations in supercritical carbon dioxide (scCO2).
We discovered unexpected solubility and controlled reactivity of fluoropolymers
in this medium that we exploited to develop an environmentally friendly
synthetic option for manufacturing industrially important fluoropolymers
with the potential to change the industry. Further research into the
development of surfactants for CO2 was largely supported
through the National Science Foundation Science and Technology Center
(NSF STC) for Environmentally Responsible Solvents and Processes (CERSP),
which involved participants from the University of North Carolina
at Chapel Hill (UNC), North Carolina State University (NCSU), North
Carolina A&T University (NCAT), University of Texas at Austin
(UT), and the Georgia Institute of Technology (GIT). At our home institutions,
UNC and NCSU, our research led us to develop the use of CO2 as an environmentally friendly dry cleaning process for fabrics
and semiconductor processes. As a result of the long-range structure
within the NSF STC, we had the advantage of being able to pivot into
new opportune areas of research over the course of the center lifetime
(1999–2009). Our synthetic processes were used to produce new
fluoropolymers with new properties that we adapted to the fields of
microfluidics and photolithography, leading us to develop a brand
new industrial process for producing medically relevant nanoparticles
with controlled shape and size called particle replication in nonwetting
templates (PRINT). As a result of the pivot of our research focus
to nanoparticle production and the use of nanoparticles to pursue
novel approaches to vaccine design and cancer treatment, we have been
fortunate to help launch and then be able to work within the Carolina
Center for Cancer Nanotechnology Excellence (CCNE) funded by the National
Cancer Institute (NCI), currently one of only six CCNEs in the country.
Concurrently, we maintained research interests outside of the opportunities
offered by PRINT. While investigating the development of nonfouling
marine coatings based on our fluoropolymers, we discovered the ability
to solubilize lithium salts and applied efforts to investigating perfluoropolyethers
as nonflammable electrolytes in lithium ion batteries. The unique
properties of these perfluorinated polymer electrolytes are still
being explored and may yet provide an opportunity for innovative leaps
in lithium battery technology. Additionally, our early fluoropolymer
technology development has helped to propel an innovative leap in
additive manufacturing. Harnessing the competing chemical reactions
of free radical polymerization and oxygen inhibition, we developed
continuous liquid interface production (CLIP). This unique 3D printing
technology that is changing the potential of manufacturing in America
is possible through the innovative use of a highly oxygen permeable
transparent window made from some of our early fluoropolymer materials.
In summary, we developed a process to create new materials. Those
new materials led to the development of additional new processes that
translated to the development of new products that are affecting society.
Polymerizations in Carbon Dioxide and Related Surfactants
While conducting graduate research with Jim McGrath at Virginia
Tech, one of the authors (J.M.D.) was exposed to supercritical fluid
extraction processes[7,8] that were used to fractionate
copolymers to determine their chemical composition distribution.[9] The supercritical fluid extraction process was
a powerful tool due to the fine control of solvating power as a function
of temperature and especially pressure. Our research program at UNC
was based on this early exposure to the power and potential of supercritical
fluids (SCFs). Our UNC group performed research in the 1990s and 2000s
synthesizing and characterizing fluoropolymers and fluorinated copolymers
in scCO2, with new compositions and architectures being
developed to explore new properties and applications for this class
of materials. Fluoropolymer synthesis in scCO2 has been
reviewed that includes our numerous contributions to the field.[10] After filing our patent applications through
the support of the chemistry department at UNC, we first reported
our new synthetic technique for fluoropolymers in a 1992 Science paper.[11] Our UNC research began with
the idea that free radical polymerizations in SCFs could be very interesting
due to the unique properties of SCFs. We proposed that while scCO2 has the density of a liquid, it has the viscosity of a gas[12] and, since free radical polymerizations are
diffusion controlled, the diffusivities would be much higher in CO2 radical reactions, which could have positive effects on the
kinetics and molecular weight. Other advantages were that there can
be no chain transfer to solvent. Prevailing theory at the time was
that radical reactions would be quenched in CO2. We found
that fluoropolymers in particular had extremely high solubility in
scCO2, and we demonstrated the synthesis of high molecular
weight perfluorinated octyl acrylate (FOA) homopolymer (Figure ) and statistical copolymers
of FOA with traditional hydrocarbons such as styrene, methyl methacrylate,
butyl acrylate, and ethylene. This discovery became very important
because at the time there was in impending ban on the use of chlorofluorocarbon
(CFC) solvents that were used for the industrial synthesis of many
fluoropolymers. Typical hydrocarbon solvents are incompatible with
the synthesis of high molecular weight fluorocarbons via free radical
chain polymerization due to the highly reactive nature of electrophilic
radicals associated with fluorocarbons, which leads to high degrees
of chain transfer with hydrogen containing solvents. Homogeneous polymerizations
in CFC solvents were the option of choice for the manufacture of nonaqueous
grades of important fluoropolymers, such as electronics grades of
polytetrafluoroethylene and its derivatives, commonly known as Teflon,
which are used in many important industries (e.g., wire coatings for
high speed communications, high temperature lubricants, nonstick coatings,
and corrosive chemical linings and coatings). An important alternative
method of polymerization, still utilized today, was emulsion polymerization
of tetrafluoroethylene (TFE) using perfluorinated surfactants, such
as perfluorooctanesulfonate (PFOS), which have been shown, along with
the acid form, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), to have a wide and persistent
presence in water, soil, and biological systems after many years of
use in industrial processes and products.[13] In 1995 we reported the successful synthesis of tetrafluoroethylene-based
fluoropolymers in scCO2.[14] In
1996–1998 three U.S. patents were issued to the University
of North Carolina for the scCO2 synthesis of fluoropolymers.[15−17] In April of 1999 it was announced that DuPont Co., having exclusively
licensed the technology from UNC, had begun construction on a $40
million, 2.5 million lb/year development and manufacturing facility
to make melt-processable fluoropolymers using a process based on scCO2.[18] The scCO2 based
licensed technology was not pursued to a significant extent by DuPont
after internal corporate decisions to proceed with production using
only the emulsion process based on PFOS. This result was a disappointing
one for us, and for society, because of the environmental implications
of continuing the use of the PFOS surfactant based technology. The
demonstrably safer licensed technology using scCO2 was
not scaled up and utilized beyond the initial investment due to political
and economic based decisions within DuPont. This is an important example
of how even the best technology can succumb to the pressures of “business”
in the hands of entrenched corporate interests. In many ways this
negative experience with DuPont drove our entrepreneurial interests
and diminished our interests in partnering exclusively with existing
companies that could, for whatever reason, not drive technology forward
in a manner in which we would have, had we controlled our own destiny.
Figure 1
Homopolymerization
of fluorinated octyl acrylate in CO2.
Homopolymerization
of fluorinated octyl acrylate in CO2.The success of using scCO2 for fluoropolymer synthesis
triggered our proposal for and award of one of five NSF Science and
Technology Centers in 1999. Our initial developments were solution
polymerizations in scCO2. We were also interested in conducting
heterogeneous polymerizations in scCO2 such as commercially
relevant emulsion polymerizations. Traditional emulsion polymerizations
utilize surfactants to disperse organic reactants, and the resultant
colloidal reaction products, in water. For our purposes we needed
to develop surfactants that would disperse organic reactants in scCO2.We developed fluoropolymer-based surfactants specifically
for CO2 that benefited many industrial solvent intensive
processes
by reducing the use of organic and halogenated solvents. We designed
the CO2 surfactants to include a “CO2-philic” portion and a “CO2-phobic”
portion (Figure )
and developed a variety of compositions and architectures.[19−22] Typical surfactants for water-based emulsions combine a hydrophilic
portion and a lipophilic (or hydrophobic) portion. In an early example
we synthesized a series of block copolymers incorporating a polystyrene
block (CO2-phobic) and a poly(1,1-dihydroperfluorooctyl
acrylate) (PFOA) block (CO2-philic).[23] Through a very successful collaboration with George Wignall
at Oak Ridge National Laboratories, small angle neutron scattering
(SANS) was used to characterize micelles formed by these block copolymer
surfactants in scCO2 and demonstrate the emulsification
of a hydrocarbon oligomer at up to 20 wt %.[19] In 1997 we further demonstrated the use of dendritic CO2 surfactants, where a perfluoroether acid fluoride was used to functionalize
an amine terminated fourth generation hydrophilic dendrimer, creating
a hydrophilic/CO2-phobic core with a CO2-philic
shell. The resulting surfactant was insoluble in water but soluble
in CO2 at a variety of temperatures, including room temperature,
at pressures >76 atm. This dendritic surfactant was used to extract
water-soluble/CO2 insoluble organic dyes, including methyl
orange, from water into a CO2 phase without agitation,
at room temperature. This functionality had significant potential
impact in environmental remediation of contaminated water, the extraction
of pharmaceutical products, the encapsulation of drugs for targeted
delivery, and the transport of reagents for chemical reactions (such
as polymerizations) in liquid and supercritical CO2 solvents,
thereby avoiding unwanted organic and hydrocarbon solvents.[21] With our patented technology we started a company
to replace toxic chemicals in the dry cleaning industry with environmentally
friendly processes using scCO2 and CO2 surfactants.
Figure 2
Block
copolymer surfactant design for CO2.
Block
copolymer surfactant design for CO2.Perfluorinated polyethers (PFPE)s are liquid fluoropolymers
that
were commercially produced using a photo-oxidation reaction either
in bulk or in CFC solutions. Based on our previous successes synthesizing
fluoropolymers using free radical chain polymerization in scCO2, we demonstrated the photo-oxidation reaction of hexafluoropropylene
(HFP) in scCO2 (Figure ).[24] The unique properties
of the perfluorinated polyethers were highly suited to applications
where silicones were being applied. PDMS and PFPE materials have many
features in common including low Tg, low
surface energy, high gas permeability, low modulus elastomers, and
low toxicity. One major difference is the high organic solvent resistance
of the PFPE materials compared to PDMS.
Figure 3
Peroxidic perfluoropolyether
synthesis via HFP photooxidation.[24]
Peroxidic perfluoropolyether
synthesis via HFP photooxidation.[24]
And Then There Was “Liquid
Teflon”
In
the early 2000s Stephen Quake, a Caltech (now Stanford University)
physicist and major innovator in the development of microfluidic device
applications, was pioneering the development of microfluidic devices
on a chip using soft microlithography using a heat curable PDMS elastomer.[25−29] Applications for microfluidic devices included genome mapping, rapid
separations, sensors, nanoscale reactors, inkjet printing, and drug
screening. Through collaboration and discussions with Quake, we identified
that the greatest limiting factor in using PDMS in microfluidic devices
was its poor solvent resistance. A major drawback of the silicone
based microfluidic devices was the poor solvent resistance of the
cross-linked PDMS that swelled in the presence of organic solvents,
limiting the utility of the microfluidic devices to primarily aqueous
based applications. We recognized the similarities and potential differentiated
advantages of a network form of silicones and a network form of PFPEs
that we referred to as “Liquid Teflon”. In 2004 we reported
the first PFPE based microfluidic device based on a PFPE elastomer.
The synthesis of the PFPE elastomer is provided in Figure . A liquid diol terminated
PFPE oligomer was functionalized with photo-cross-linkable methacrylate
end groups, mixed with a photoinitiator, placed into a mold, and exposed
to UV light to photopolymerize the network. The simple device, with
channels on the order of 100 μm wide, was compared to a similar
device produced from a commercial PDMS to demonstrate the greatly
enhanced solvent resistance of the PFPE based device that allowed
flow of organic solvents, such as toluene and dichloromethane, that
the PDMS device did not.[30]
Figure 4
Synthesis and curing
of photocurable PFPE.
Synthesis and curing
of photocurable PFPE.We identified a great opportunity for the PFPE elastomers
in the
area of nanofabrication processes. George Whitesides provided insight
in his 2003 Perspective in Nature Biotechnology regarding
“size” with respect to nanobiotechnology.[31] He believed that nanoscience could provide important
new materials and structures for biology based on technology developments
such as soft lithography and inkjet printing. Imprint lithography,
as a technique for manufacturing integrated circuits as well as nanofluidic
devices with features on the order of 100 nm, was being developed
primarily based on using PDMS elastomers due to many of its attributes
that are similar to PFPE elastomers. Leveraging the diverse expertise
in our group, as well as insights generated from dialogue with partners
and colleagues in the field, we realized that the PFPE elastomers
were an even better fit for this application than PDMS. Both PDMS
and PFPE are UV transparent, low Tg, low
modulus, and low surface energy materials. However, our PFPE elastomers
offered greater solvent resistance, higher modulus, and lower surface
energy than the commercially available silicones typically used (Dow
Corning’s Sylgard 184). In 2004 we demonstrated the utility
of PFPE as a highly effective material for imprint lithography of
organic materials on the nanoscale.[32] Using
a patterned silicon wafer master with square channel features of 2
μm in width and spacings that were 5 μm deep, we prepared
PFPE molds by coating the master with the PFPE liquid resin and photocuring
for 1 min. The cured PFPE elastomer was easily peeled from the master.
The performance of the PFPE mold was compared to a PDMS mold prepared
using the same master. The PDMS required that a fluorinated pretreatment
be applied to the master to allow good release of the mold after the
15 h 80 °C cure. Photocured acrylate based replicates prepared
using the PFPE mold were of significantly higher quality than acrylate
replicates prepared using the PDMS mold. The PDMS mold swelled in
the presence of the uncured acrylate, and had some adhesion to the
cured acrylate that distorted the shapes of the replicate and endowed
it with small pieces of torn PDMS mold that could be seen at high
magnification (see Figure G). As a true test of nanoscale fabrication, we applied the
PFPE to a silicon wafer master with much smaller features, having
a width of 140 nm, spacing of 70 nm, and a depth of approximately
50 nm, and created a PFPE nanomold. The nanomold was used to produce
photocured acrylate based replicates that looked identical to the
master. The PFPE nanomold was easily removed from the cured acrylate
replicate due to its low surface energy and flexibility. Useful PDMS
molds of the nanoscale master could not be produced. The finding of
the effectiveness of the PFPE elastomers as nanomolding materials
was a huge development, as it enabled a much easier method for fabrication
of nanoscale devices that could have applications in important and
growing technology areas such as medicine, electronics, and sensors.
Figure 5
Images
of a silicon master with 2 mm features (A), PFPE and PDMS
molds made from this master (B, E), and replicate molds of TMPTA using
the corresponding stamps (C, D, F, G). While both elastomers produced
molds of high quality, the TMPTA replicate made with the PDMS mold
contains residual PDMS that was ripped from the mold presumably because
of adhesion (F, G). In contrast, the low surface energy PFPE mold
was easily released from the TMPTA replicate (D). The submicron striated
features on the replicate in panel D are present on the silicon master
and are a result of multiple etching steps used during its fabrication.[32]
Images
of a silicon master with 2 mm features (A), PFPE and PDMS
molds made from this master (B, E), and replicate molds of TMPTA using
the corresponding stamps (C, D, F, G). While both elastomers produced
molds of high quality, the TMPTA replicate made with the PDMS mold
contains residual PDMS that was ripped from the mold presumably because
of adhesion (F, G). In contrast, the low surface energy PFPE mold
was easily released from the TMPTA replicate (D). The submicron striated
features on the replicate in panel D are present on the silicon master
and are a result of multiple etching steps used during its fabrication.[32]The potential to mold organic materials into nanoscale structures
was evident using the PFPE mold materials. Concurrent to this work,
local collaborations with the Department of Pharmacology, the School
of Pharmacy, and the Gene Therapy Center at UNC, as well as the Department
of Engineering at NCSU, were focused on a different process, inverse
microemulsion polymerization, to produce nanoparticles for the purpose
of cellular gene and antisense delivery.[33] It occurred to us that the nanofabrication micromolding process
could open up opportunities in the area of nanoscale organic particles
for gene therapy as well as drug delivery. We realized that imprint
lithography using PDMS, silicon, glass, or quartz molds was ineffective
because the organic liquids to be molded showed significant interfacial
interaction with the surfaces of molds and left a very thin layer
of material between the mold surfaces upon filling and closing. This
very thin layer, known as a “scum”, served to hold the
nanoparticles together. The advantage of using a PFPE nanomold and
cover sheet was that the very low surface energy of the PFPE caused
it to be only partially wetting to most organic liquids, and therefore
the PFPE surfaces could come together cleanly and isolate the molding
material into the mold cavities under small pressure. We coined this
nanomolding technique as “PRINT”, which stands for particle
replication in nonwetting templates (Figure ). The intentional creation of this recognizable
acronym to describe our process was a driver for differentiation of
our work from the alternative processes. It allowed us to take ownership
of the process and materials, which helped to illustrate the uniqueness
of the products produced using it and the opportunities for wide application
of the process.
Figure 6
Examples of PRINT fabricated particles with a range of
shapes,
sizes, and physical and chemical properties.
Examples of PRINT fabricated particles with a range of
shapes,
sizes, and physical and chemical properties.In 2005 we demonstrated the broad potential for PRINT, showing
the production of isolated nanoparticles of commercially relevant
materials including poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), poly(d-lactic
acid) (PLA), and poly(pyrrole) (PPy).[34] We produced nanoparticles using different synthetic routes with
PRINT, including free radical polymerization, metal-catalyzed high
temperature polymerization, and oxidative coupling using a strong
acid, demonstrating flexibility and range in the process. The ability
to choose the chemistry of the particle opens up the options for drugs
and other agents to be successfully encapsulated in the particles
for later application in areas such as oncology and vaccine design.
The ability to change the shape enables control of interaction, delivery,
transport, and packing in colloidal particles. We showed that a range
of relevant sizes (<100 nm) and shapes of nanoparticles could be
produced with PRINT for applications including drug delivery and sensing.
We also used PRINT to load relevant cargoes into nanoparticles such
as an oligonucleotide, avidin (a biologically active protein), and
doxorubicin (an important chemotherapy agent). We showed that the
agents were dispersed, available, and active from PRINT nanoparticles.
The introduction of PRINT laid the foundation for a broad set of research
activities that proceeded over the next decade in our UNC-CH and NC
State laboratories, leading to a significant growth in the life sciences
component of the research group and significant collaborations with
medical and pharmaceutical researchers.[35−40]With PRINT’s broad potential to lead to commercial
products,
we also secured key patents leading to the launch of a startup company,
based on PRINT, Liquidia Technologies. Through careful implementation
of a thorough conflict of interest management plan by UNC-CH, our
academic laboratory and the company were able to forge an amazing
partnership that drove the technology in new directions and into the
clinic. Liquidia was successful at winning venture capital funding
to scale up the PRINT process, which further enabled research in new
areas applicable to PRINT to continue at UNC. Molds manufactured at
Liquidia were shared with the UNC lab as part of a research agreement
between Liquidia and the DeSimone group at UNC, and UNC groups collaborated
closely with Liquidia, preparing and testing PRINT nanoparticles with
different properties for a wide variety of applications. This relationship
was highly beneficial to the growing company and to the university.
As the company has grown and changed, focusing on economic drivers
required in commercial industries, the range of the Liquidia/UNC collaboration
has been narrowed as a result of greater separation in immediate and
long-term goals.In the mid to late 2000s fluorinated polymers,
in conjunction with
highly hydrophilic polymers, were being investigated as environmentally
friendly amphiphilic anti-biofouling coatings for application in marine
environments. Christopher Ober’s group was designing grafted
block copolymers of aliphatic fluorocarbons and poly(ethylene glycol)
(PEG).[41,42] Karen Wooley’s group was using hyperbranched
highly fluorinated poly(styrene)s and poly(arylene ether)s cross-linked
with PEG to create amphiphilic cross-linked networks.[43,44] All of these approaches were remarkably successful at reducing biofouling
of both hydrophobic based and hydrophilic based marine organisms,
which led us to consider the use of perfluoroethers for this application.
Through funding from the Office of Naval Research (ONR), we began
to focus on the development of nonfouling marine coatings based on
amphiphilic hybrid materials using PFPEs and hydrophilic poly(ethylene
glycol) (PEG).[45] Surprisingly, we found
that low molecular weight (1000 g/mol) PFPE could be blended with
low molecular weight PEG (<1000 g/mol) to provide optically transparent
blends. We found this to be true for both the diol and dimethacrylate
end-capped oligomer forms. We functionalized the oligomers with dimethacrylate
end groups and photocured films of the PFPE/PEG blends to create a
range of film compositions that showed a range of morphologies indicating
nanophase separation shown by atomic force microscopy (AFM) and dynamical
mechanical thermal analysis (DMTA). The films showed the potential
to reduce fouling even with low levels of PEG, but the highly interesting
finding from this research was the unexpected miscibility of the PFPE/PEG
blends.We began to explore other applications, focusing in
areas where
PEG had utility but faced drawbacks that the inclusion of PFPE might
address. PEG and PFPE are both aliphatic polyethers with a subambient Tg, although the Tg of PFPE is substantially lower and PFPE does not crystallize. Being
a fluorocarbon, PFPE also offers the potential for improved thermo-oxidative
stability. Once armed with the surprising discovery that PFPE and
PEG were miscible, we began to explore the phase equilibria of a ternary
system of PFPE, PEG, and lithium salts, because it was well-known
that PEG would dissolve lithium salts, and perhaps, we hypothesized,
given the thermo-oxidative stability of PFPEs, such a ternary system
would be nonflammable. Perhaps not unexpectedly, we found that a 50:50
blend of PFPE and PEG could dissolve lithium salts. But very surprisingly,
when we started to vary the stoichiometry of the ternary system, we
discovered that pure PFPE, without PEG, could dissolve lithium salts!
Given the hydrophobic nature and the electron deficient ether bonds
of the PFPE, this was a real shocker to us.In collaboration
with Nitash Balsara’s group at the University
of California, Berkeley (UCB), we explored the electrochemical properties
of PFPE blends with the well-known bis(trifluoromethane)-sulfonimide
lithium salt (LiTFSI).[46] The solubility
of LiTFSI in the PFPE oligomers decreased inversely with molecular
weight and increased with a synthetic modification of the hydroxyl
end groups to methyl carbonate end groups. Electrochemical measurements
showed that the conductivity of the PFPE/LiTFSI polymer electrolytes
was significantly lower than that of analogous PEG/LiTFSI polymer
electrolytes. However, the transference number, which is a value related
to battery performance, was measured to be very near unity, an unprecedented
high value relative to all other electrolytes for lithium ion batteries.
Understanding the fundamental chemistry in the PFPE system leading
to this high transference number and utilizing that information could
lead to important breakthroughs in the field of lithium ion batteries
leading to high performance, long lasting, nonflammable batteries
for critical, portable applications including transportation. This
opportunity for liquid PFPEs is being collaboratively explored between
the DeSimone and Balsara groups through funding from the Department
of Energy (DOE) through a large, multi-institution collaborative Energy
Frontier Research Center (EFRC), the Center for Mesoscale Transport
Properties (m2M). Alternative solid state perfluorinated polymers
are being explored as battery electrolytes through a National Science
Foundation (NSF) grant held jointly by UNC and UCB. Recently published
work has shown the utility of PFPE in a hybrid single ion conducting
solid state electrolyte for lithium ion batteries.[47] These preliminary hybrid materials exhibit very high conductivities
on the order of 10–4 S/cm, a cation transference
number of close to unity, excellent stability, and low dissolution
of lithium polysulfides, making them potentially ideal candidates
for Li–S cells. The development of the materials, test cells,
and electrochemical characterization to attain such rapid progress
in the battery field was made feasible through the strong collaborations
with the Balsara group. This collaboration has also spawned a startup
company, Blue Current, which is now pursuing the development of high
performance lithium ion batteries.
Rapid and Continuous 3D
Printing?
Photopolymerization
is an important industrial process for applications including coatings,
adhesives, inks, microelectronics, dental fillings, and 3D printing,
to name a few. The majority of these applications utilize free radical
chain polymerizations of solvent free resins incorporating acrylated
and/or methacrylated oligomer and monomer formulations.[48] The advantages of utilizing a photopolymerization
process include significant positive environmental impacts such as
reduction or elimination of the use of organic solvents and low temperatures
that use less energy and cooling water. One of the major issues with
free radical photopolymerization, though, is its high sensitivity
to oxygen, which inhibits the reaction and can lead to low, surface
specific conversion. There are a number of physical and chemical strategies
that have been utilized to reduce oxygen inhibition for industrial
processes.[49]Stereolithography is
a 3D printing technique that utilizes photopolymerization to fabricate
3D structures in a layer by layer process, which, stated in another
way, is a 2D process repeated over and over. In the example of a bottom
up stereolithography apparatus (SLA), each individual photopolymer
layer is formed in a closed environment between a build plate and
a transparent window. The layer then has to be individually removed
from the window, additional photopolymer resin has to be applied to
the forming space, and then the layer is precisely lowered back down
to create the forming zone again.[50] We
conjectured that we could turn the “disadvantage” of
oxygen inhibition into an advantage that enabled continuous 3D printing.
The key to enabling this was the need for a window material that would
be simultaneously transparent to UV light, highly permeable to oxygen,
and impervious to swelling by organic liquid resins. An ideal candidate
material is Teflon AF.Understanding the potential of convergent
research, by bringing
together scientists with backgrounds in a range of areas in chemistry,
physics, and engineering, a novel 3D printing process was developed
resulting in the launch of a new company called Carbon. Our idea was
to develop a technique that allowed us to continuously grow a solid
part out of a liquid resin similar to the T-1000 Terminator that grows
from a vat of liquid metal in the movie Terminator 2. A Teflon AF membrane, with its high oxygen permeability, low surface
energy, and excellent chemical stability, was identified as the key
enabler in the technique now known as continuous liquid interface
production (CLIP). CLIP is a breakthrough process for additive manufacturing
that has also led to the development of many new classes of photocurable
3D printing materials, ranging from elastomers to high performance,
highly thermally stable materials. CLIP allowed for a fundamental
change in 3D printing; we have shifted the field from its focus on
simple prototyping, to what we refer to as functional prototyping
that yields real parts and speeds that are 25–100 times faster.[51] We believe that the manufacture of real parts
at game-changing speeds will usher in a new industrial category we
refer to as 3D manufacturing. The rapid development of the software
and hardware for the production machinery, along with new directly
suited materials with unprecedented mechanical properties, has been
made possible through the resources available from the venture capital
community and strategic partnerships (approximately $200 million)
to Carbon. What we do at Carbon is exploit the benefits derived from
the intentional emphasis on diversity, convergence, and collaboration,
especially at the intersection of hardware, software, and molecular
science. CLIP today is the essence of software controlled chemical
reactions to create final parts for designers, engineers, and manufacturers.
Critical factors that can be varied to affect the form and function
of the product being fabricated include the resin reactivity, light
absorption, viscosity, and green strength. Other factors include the
flux of oxygen, the flux of light, and the geometry and design of
the part being fabricated. The optimization and growth of this model
is enabling this future at Carbon. The fields of application include
automotive, aerospace, consumer electronics, industrial, athletic
footwear, and medical applications, to name a few. Moreover, a research
agreement between Carbon and UNC supports long-term research in applications
related to drug delivery, medical devices, and the production of microscale
features.[52]
Conclusion
New Processes
Can Change the Game
Commercial processes
widely used to produce industrial and consumer products have a significant
impact on the environment, the economy, and the products available
to consumers. Novel processes developed on a small scale may provide
opportunities for significant economic savings through reduced environmental
impacts or improved products, but entrenched processes are often perpetuated
due to the perceived imbalance of the cost of infrastructure investment
into new processes. Successfully bringing a novel process to market
is a tricky proposition that must be carefully addressed by a team,
including a range of scientists, engineers, and business professionals,
through an intentionally orchestrated sequence of events and technical
developments.It is exciting to consider the creation of a future
fabricated with light. We like to consider light as our chisel for
fabricating things. The metaphor of light as a chisel is a powerful
one, and it helps to illustrate to our partners, customers, and investors
what such a new future could mean. Currently polymers are made by
a polymer supplier and provided to product manufacturers who process
that polymer further to produce a polymer part. The polymer making
up that part is always impacted by factors such as aging, contamination,
and thermal-oxidative degradation to some extent, and therefore the
polymer in the product does not have the same properties as the polymer
that was originally made by the polymer manufacturer. Fabrication
with light skips a step in this traditional manufacturing model. The
polymer is produced simultaneously with the part, and therefore their
properties are the same. The product properties are what become important,
and those are a function of the starting materials, the process, and
the design, which all come together in a single fabrication step.
This could truly change the market as polymer producers change their
strategies to produce better resins which are processed, packaged,
shipped, and stored differently than current thermoplastic resins
typically utilized to mold plastic parts. This is not to say that
all thermoplastic molding will be replaced through fabrication with
light. The greatest value in the fabrication with light is the potential
to make parts that cannot be molded or mass customized, or bespoke
parts like materials for applications in dentistry, hearing aids,
and even footwear.The job of a research-active professor is
a many faceted one. Contributing
to department organization and structure; teaching and grading college
and graduate students in their fields of study; writing grant proposals
and reports; purchasing, maintaining, and organizing laboratories
and equipment; directing graduate and collaborative research; and
authoring and editing publications of research all require a driven
and persevering personality along with good interpersonal and organizational
skills. To be successful in all of these areas requires the development
of a team that is effective. Running a good research group with an
emphasis on translating discoveries into real-world applications has
many similarities to running a small company organizationally, although
the financial structure, intentionally high personnel turnover rate,
goals, and outputs differ significantly.While it is not the
typical outcome, the optimism with which a
scientist approaches research through the translation of fundamental
scientific discoveries into practical solutions for society can be
highly motivating and rewarding. Being awarded a proposal for scientific
research funding can enable the exciting transition from ideas to
discovery, then from discovery to practical application. Identifying
the key discoveries, and translating those into solutions, is most
effectively accomplished through convergent, collaborative research
involving multiple disciplines and groups of people with diverse backgrounds
and expertise. The successful development and commercialization of
products relies on the unique capacities found in private industry,
which provides a very different environment compared to an academic
research group or center. Becoming familiar with the economies of
starting materials and scale-up factors coupled with legal and regulatory
requirements, packaging, marketing, and distribution can be overwhelming
to an uninitiated scientist, and therefore a fruitful translation
of academic research to the marketplace typically depends on outreach
to, and collaboration with, experts in the area of business. Many
universities are now emphasizing technology transfer offices, campus
incubator spaces, and other campus-based resources designed to help
lower the barriers associated with an endeavor to commercialize innovations
spawned from academic research.Finally, in business and in
research alike, we have found that
perhaps the biggest factor for success is understanding the convergence
paradigm and operating in it by bringing together a diverse group
of people; facilitating open and respectful communication of ideas,
knowledge, and perspectives; and working collaboratively toward shared
goals. This enables maximum leveraging of knowledge with respect to
identifying and addressing the key questions that bear relevance to
societal needs and challenges, leading to successful translation of
science to real world solutions.
Authors: Jason P Rolland; R Michael Van Dam; Derek A Schorzman; Stephen R Quake; Joseph M DeSimone Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2004-03-03 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Jason P Rolland; Erik C Hagberg; Ginger M Denison; Kenneth R Carter; Joseph M De Simone Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2004-11-05 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Irune Villaluenga; Kevin H Wujcik; Wei Tong; Didier Devaux; Dominica H C Wong; Joseph M DeSimone; Nitash P Balsara Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-12-22 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Stephanie E A Gratton; Patricia A Ropp; Patrick D Pohlhaus; J Christopher Luft; Victoria J Madden; Mary E Napier; Joseph M DeSimone Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-08-12 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Jing Xu; Dominica H C Wong; James D Byrne; Kai Chen; Charles Bowerman; Joseph M DeSimone Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2013-05-13 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Stephanie E A Gratton; Stuart S Williams; Mary E Napier; Patrick D Pohlhaus; Zhilian Zhou; Kenton B Wiles; Benjamin W Maynor; Clifton Shen; Tove Olafsen; Edward T Samulski; Joseph M Desimone Journal: Acc Chem Res Date: 2008-12 Impact factor: 22.384