| Title |
Daunorubicin and gambogic acid coloaded cysteamine-CdTe quantum dots minimizing the multidrug resistance of lymphoma in vitro and in vivo
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s115037 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yi Zhou, Ruju Wang, Bing Chen, Dan Sun, Yong Hu, Peipei Xu |
| Abstract |
To minimize the side effects and the multidrug resistance (MDR) arising from daunorubicin (DNR) treatment of malignant lymphoma, a chemotherapy formulation of cysteamine-modified cadmium tellurium (Cys-CdTe) quantum dots coloaded with DNR and gambogic acid (GA) nanoparticles (DNR-GA-Cys-CdTe NPs) was developed. The physical property, drug-loading efficiency and drug release behavior of these DNR-GA-Cys-CdTe NPs were evaluated, and their cytotoxicity was explored by 3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-y1]-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay. These DNR-GA-Cys-CdTe NPs possessed a pH-responsive behavior, and displayed a dose-dependent antiproliferative activity on multidrug-resistant lymphoma Raji/DNR cells. The accumulation of DNR inside the cells, revealed by flow cytometry assay, and the down-regulated expression of P-glycoprotein inside the Raji/DNR cells measured by Western blotting assay indicated that these DNR-GA-Cys-CdTe NPs could minimize the MDR of Raji/DNR cells. This multidrug delivery system would be a promising strategy for minimizing MDR against the lymphoma. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 21 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 5 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 19% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 10% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 4 | 19% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 14% |
| Chemistry | 2 | 10% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 10% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
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 19 October 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,645
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,470
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#216,526
of 332,577 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#79
of 111 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 332,577 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 111 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.