↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Size-dependent cytotoxicity of Fe3O4 nanoparticles induced by biphasic regulation of oxidative stress in different human hepatoma cells

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 Mendeley
Title
Size-dependent cytotoxicity of Fe3O4 nanoparticles induced by biphasic regulation of oxidative stress in different human hepatoma cells
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, July 2016
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s105575
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yuexia Xie, Dejun Liu, Chenlei Cai, Xiaojing Chen, Yan Zhou, Liangliang Wu, Yongwei Sun, Huili Dai, Xianming Kong, Peifeng Liu

Abstract

The application of Fe3O4 nanoparticles (NPs) has made great progress in the diagnosis of disease and in the drug delivery system for cancer therapy, but the relative mechanisms of potential toxicity induced by Fe3O4 have not kept pace with its development in the application, which has hampered its further clinical application. In this article, we used two kinds of human hepatoma cell lines, SK-Hep-1 and Hep3B, to investigate the cytotoxic effects and the involved mechanisms of small Fe3O4 NPs with different diameters (6 nm, 9 nm, and 14 nm). Results showed that the size of NPs effectively influences the cytotoxicity of hepatoma cells: 6 nm Fe3O4 NPs exhibited negligible cytotoxicity and 9 nm Fe3O4 NPs affected cytotoxicity via cellular mitochondrial dysfunction and by inducing necrosis mediated through the mitochondria-dependent intracellular reactive oxygen species generation. Meanwhile, 14 nm Fe3O4 NPs induced cytotoxicity by impairing the integrity of plasma membrane and promoting massive lactate dehydrogenase leakage. These results explain the detailed mechanism of different diameters of small Fe3O4 NPs-induced cytotoxicity. We anticipate that this study will provide different insights into the cytotoxicity mechanism of Fe3O4 NPs, so as to make them safer to use in clinical application.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 52 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 19%
Researcher 10 19%
Student > Bachelor 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 12 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 13%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 13%
Chemistry 6 12%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Physics and Astronomy 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 18 35%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 01 August 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,970
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#268,227
of 367,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#113
of 121 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.