↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effects of intermolecular interactions on the stability of carbon nanotube–gold nanoparticle conjugates in solution

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
13 Mendeley
Title
Effects of intermolecular interactions on the stability of carbon nanotube–gold nanoparticle conjugates in solution
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2016
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s117858
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lukasz Konczak, Jolanta Narkiewicz-Michalek, Giorgia Pastorin, Tomasz Panczyk

Abstract

This work deals with the role of intermolecular interactions in the stability of a carbon nanotube (CNT) capped by functionalized gold nanoparticles (AuNPs). The importance of such a system is due to its potential application as a pH-controlled drug carrier. Our preliminary experimental studies showed that fabrication of such a nanobottle/nanocontainer is feasible and it is possible to encapsulate the anticancer drug cisplatin inside the inner space of a CNT and seal its ends by functionalized AuNPs. The expected behavior, that is, detachment of AuNPs at acidic pH and the release of cisplatin, was, however, not observed. On the other hand, our theoretical studies of chemically identical system led to the conclusion that the release of cisplatin at acidic pH should be observed. Therefore, in this work, a deeper theoretical analysis of various factors that could be responsible for the disagreement between experimental and theoretical results were performed. The study found that the major factor is a large dispersion interaction component acting between CNT and AuNP in solution in the case of the experimental system. This factor can be controlled to some extent by tuning the system size or the ratio between AuNP diameter and CNT diameter. Thus, such kind of a pH-sensitive drug carrier is still of great interest, but its structural parameters need to be properly adjusted.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 13 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 13 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 3 23%
Professor > Associate Professor 1 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 1 8%
Unknown 8 62%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 1 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 8%
Materials Science 1 8%
Chemistry 1 8%
Unknown 9 69%
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 08 November 2016.
All research outputs
#19,944,091
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,971
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,759
of 317,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#76
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 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 317,805 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.