| Title |
Radiolabeling, whole-body single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography imaging, and pharmacokinetics of carbon nanohorns in mice
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s103162 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Minfang Zhang, Dhifaf A Jasim, Cécilia Ménard-Moyon, Antonio Nunes, Sumio Iijima, Alberto Bianco, Masako Yudasaka, Kostas Kostarelos |
| Abstract |
In this work, we report that the biodistribution and excretion of carbon nanohorns (CNHs) in mice are dependent on their size and functionalization. Small-sized CNHs (30-50 nm; S-CNHs) and large-sized CNHs (80-100 nm; L-CNHs) were chemically functionalized and radiolabeled with [(111)In]-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid and intravenously injected into mice. Their tissue distribution profiles at different time points were determined by single photon emission computed tomography/computed tomography. The results showed that the S-CNHs circulated longer in blood, while the L-CNHs accumulated faster in major organs like the liver and spleen. Small amounts of S-CNHs- and L-CNHs were excreted in urine within the first few hours postinjection, followed by excretion of smaller quantities within the next 48 hours in both urine and feces. The kinetics of excretion for S-CNHs were more rapid than for L-CNHs. Both S-CNH and L-CNH material accumulated mainly in the liver and spleen; however, S-CNH accumulation in the spleen was more prominent than in the liver. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 24 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 24 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 4 | 17% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 17% |
| Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 8 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 13% |
| Materials Science | 3 | 13% |
| Chemistry | 3 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Psychology | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 42% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 July 2016.
All research outputs
#14,915,133
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,586
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#196,838
of 367,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#43
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 59% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 367,269 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 121 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.