| Title |
Application of liposomal technologies for delivery of platinum analogs in oncology
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2013
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s38354 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Demin Liu, Chunbai He, Andrew Z Wang, Wenbin Lin |
| Abstract |
Platinum-based chemotherapy, such as cisplatin, oxaliplatin, and carboplatin, is one of the most widely utilized classes of cancer therapeutics. While highly effective, the clinical applications of platinum-based drugs are limited by their toxicity profiles as well as suboptimal pharmacokinetic properties. Therefore, one of the key research areas in oncology has been to develop novel platinum analog drugs and engineer new platinum drug formulations to improve the therapeutic ratio further. Such efforts have led to the development of platinum analogs including nedaplatin, heptaplatin, and lobaplatin. Moreover, reformulating platinum drugs using liposomes has resulted in the development of L-NDPP (Aroplatin™), SPI-77, Lipoplatin™, Lipoxal™, and LiPlaCis®. Liposomes possess several attractive biological activities, including biocompatibility, high drug loading, and improved pharmacokinetics, that are well suited for platinum drug delivery. In this review, we discuss the various platinum drugs and their delivery using liposome-based drug delivery vehicles. We compare and contrast the different liposome platforms as well as speculate on the future of platinum drug delivery research. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 80% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 20% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 125 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Russia | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 124 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 35 | 28% |
| Student > Master | 17 | 14% |
| Researcher | 15 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 7% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 4% |
| Other | 16 | 13% |
| Unknown | 28 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 20 | 16% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 13% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 10% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 10 | 8% |
| Other | 19 | 15% |
| Unknown | 33 | 26% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 05 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,340,334
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#643
of 4,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#49,952
of 210,451 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#19
of 101 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,077 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% 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 210,451 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 101 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 82% of its contemporaries.