Why do phospholipid polymers reduce protein adsorption?

The amount of plasma protein adsorbed on a phospholipid polymer having a 2-methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine (MPC) moiety was reduced compared to the amount of protein adsorbed onto poly[2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA)], poly[n-butyl methacrylate (BMA)], and BMA copolymers with acrylamide (AAm) or N-vinyl pyrrolidone (VPy) moieties having a hydrophilic fraction. To clarify the reason for the reduced protein adsorption on the MPC polymer, the water structure in the hydrated polymer was examined with attention to the free water fraction. Hydration of the polymers occurred when they were immersed in water. The differential scanning calorimetric analysis of these hydrated polymers revealed that the free water fractions in the poly(MPC-co-BMA) and poly(MPC-co-n-dodecyl methacrylate) with a 0.30 MPC mole fraction were above 0.70. On the other hand, the free water fractions in the poly(HEMA), poly(AAm-co-BMA), and poly(VPy-co-BMA) were below 0.42. The conformational change in proteins adsorbed on the MPC polymers and poly(HEMA) were determined using ultraviolet and circular dichroism spectroscopic measurements. Proteins adsorbed on poly(HEMA) changed considerably, but those adsorbed on poly(MPC-co-BMA) with a 0.30 MPC mole fraction differed little from the native state. We concluded from these results that fewer proteins are adsorbed and their original conformation is not changed on polymer surfaces that possess a high free water fraction.