| Title |
Nanomedicine strategy for optimizing delivery to outer hair cells by surface-modified poly(lactic/glycolic acid) nanoparticles with hydrophilic molecules
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s116867 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Xingxing Wen, Shan Ding, Hui Cai, Junyi Wang, Lu Wen, Fan Yang, Gang Chen |
| Abstract |
Targeted drug delivery to outer hair cells (OHCs) in the cochlea by nanomedicine strategies forms an effective therapeutic approach for treating hearing loss. Surface chemistry plays a deciding role in nanoparticle (NP) biodistribution, but its influence on such distribution in the cochlea remains largely unknown. Herein, we report the first systematic comparison of poly(lactic/glycolic acid) nanoparticles (PLGA NPs) with or without surface modification of hydrophilic molecules for optimizing the delivery to OHCs both in vitro and in vivo. NPs that were surface modified with poloxamer 407 (P407), chitosan, or methoxy poly(ethylene glycol) and the unmodified NPs were highly biocompatible with L929 and House Ear Institute-organ of Corti 1 cells as well as cochlear tissues. Interestingly, among all the examined NPs, P407-PLGA NPs showed the greatest cellular uptake and prominent fluorescence in cochlear imaging. More importantly, we provide novel evidence that the surface-modified NPs reached the organ of Corti and were transported into the OHCs at a higher level. Together, these observations suggest that surface modification with hydrophilic molecules will allow future clinical applications of PLGA NPs, especially P407-PLGA NPs, in efficient hearing loss therapy. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 34 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 20% |
| Researcher | 5 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 6% |
| Professor | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 9% |
| Unknown | 13 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 8 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 14% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 4 | 11% |
| Engineering | 4 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 6% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 12 | 34% |
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 10 November 2016.
All research outputs
#22,758,309
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#3,598
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,943
of 317,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#87
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.