↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Effective heating of magnetic nanoparticle aggregates for in vivo nano-theranostic hyperthermia

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
Title
Effective heating of magnetic nanoparticle aggregates for in vivo nano-theranostic hyperthermia
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2017
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s141072
Pubmed ID
Authors

Chencai Wang, Chao-Hsiung Hsu, Zhao Li, Lian-Pin Hwang, Ying-Chih Lin, Pi-Tai Chou, Yung-Ya Lin

Abstract

Magnetic resonance (MR) nano-theranostic hyperthermia uses magnetic nanoparticles to target and accumulate at the lesions and generate heat to kill lesion cells directly through hyperthermia or indirectly through thermal activation and control releasing of drugs. Preclinical and translational applications of MR nano-theranostic hyperthermia are currently limited by a few major theoretical difficulties and experimental challenges in in vivo conditions. For example, conventional models for estimating the heat generated and the optimal magnetic nanoparticle sizes for hyperthermia do not accurately reproduce reported in vivo experimental results. In this work, a revised cluster-based model was proposed to predict the specific loss power (SLP) by explicitly considering magnetic nanoparticle aggregation in in vivo conditions. By comparing with the reported experimental results of magnetite Fe3O4 and cobalt ferrite CoFe2O4 magnetic nanoparticles, it is shown that the revised cluster-based model provides a more accurate prediction of the experimental values than the conventional models that assume magnetic nanoparticles act as single units. It also provides a clear physical picture: the aggregation of magnetic nanoparticles increases the cluster magnetic anisotropy while reducing both the cluster domain magnetization and the average magnetic moment, which, in turn, shift the predicted SLP toward a smaller magnetic nanoparticle diameter with lower peak values. As a result, the heating efficiency and the SLP values are decreased. The improvement in the prediction accuracy in in vivo conditions is particularly pronounced when the magnetic nanoparticle diameter is in the range of ~10-20 nm. This happens to be an important size range for MR cancer nano-theranostics, as it exhibits the highest efficacy against both primary and metastatic tumors in vivo. Our studies show that a relatively 20%-25% smaller magnetic nanoparticle diameter should be chosen to reach the maximal heating efficiency in comparison with the optimal size predicted by previous models.

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 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 25%
Researcher 8 16%
Unspecified 5 10%
Student > Master 5 10%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 8%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 11 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 7 14%
Materials Science 7 14%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 10%
Unspecified 5 10%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 8%
Other 8 16%
Unknown 15 29%
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 29 August 2017.
All research outputs
#17,292,294
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,470
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#209,586
of 327,503 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#53
of 99 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 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 327,503 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 99 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.