↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Magnetic fluid hyperthermia enhances cytotoxicity of bortezomib in sensitive and resistant cancer cell lines

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Readers on

mendeley
50 Mendeley
Title
Magnetic fluid hyperthermia enhances cytotoxicity of bortezomib in sensitive and resistant cancer cell lines
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, December 2013
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s51435
Pubmed ID
Authors

Merlis P Alvarez-Berríos, Amalchi Castillo, Carlos Rinaldi, Madeline Torres-Lugo

Abstract

The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib (BZ) has shown promising results in some types of cancer, but in others it has had minimal activity. Recent studies have reported enhanced efficacy of BZ when combined with hyperthermia. However, the use of magnetic nanoparticles to induce hyperthermia in combination with BZ has not been reported. This novel hyperthermia modality has shown better potentiation of chemotherapeutics over other types of hyperthermia. We hypothesized that inducing hyperthermia via magnetic nanoparticles (MFH) would enhance the cytotoxicity of BZ in BZ-sensitive and BZ-resistant cancer cells more effectively than hyperthermia using a hot water bath (HWH). Studies were conducted using BZ in combination with MFH in two BZ-sensitive cell lines (MDA-MB-468, Caco-2), and one BZ-resistant cell line (A2780) at two different conditions, ie, 43°C for 30 minutes and 45°C for 30 minutes. These experiments were compared with combined application of HWH and BZ. The results indicate enhanced potentiation between hyperthermic treatment and BZ. MFH combined with BZ induced cytotoxicity in sensitive and resistant cell lines to a greater extent than HWH under the same treatment conditions. The observation that MFH sensitizes BZ-resistant cell lines makes this approach a potentially effective anticancer therapy platform.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 50 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 2%
Unknown 49 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 5 10%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 12 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 6 12%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 12%
Engineering 5 10%
Medicine and Dentistry 3 6%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 3 6%
Other 11 22%
Unknown 16 32%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 January 2014.
All research outputs
#16,868,837
of 25,584,565 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,057
of 4,077 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,912
of 321,951 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#47
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,584,565 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,077 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 321,951 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 100 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.