| Title |
Nanoparticles for hyperthermic therapy: synthesis strategies and applications in glioblastoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, June 2014
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s57501 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jyoti Verma, Sumit Lal, Cornelis JF Van Noorden |
| Abstract |
Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is the most common and most aggressive malignant primary brain tumor in humans. Current GBM treatment includes surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy, sometimes supplemented with novel therapies. Despite recent advances, survival of GBM patients remains poor. Major challenges in GBM treatment are drug delivery across the blood-brain barrier, restriction of damage to healthy brain tissues, and limitation of resistance to therapies. This article reviews recent advances in the application of magnetic nanoparticles (MNPs), gold nanorods (GNRs), and carbon nanotubes (CNTs) for hyperthermia ablation of GBM. First, the article introduces GBM, its current treatment, and hyperthermia as a potential modality for the management of GBM. Second, it introduces MNPs, GNRs, and CNTs as inorganic agents to induce hyperthermia in GBM. Third, it discusses different methodologies for synthesis of each inorganic agent. Finally, it reviews in vitro and in vivo studies in which MNPs, GNRs, and CNTs have been applied for hyperthermia ablation and drug delivery in GBM. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 204 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | <1% |
| Brazil | 2 | <1% |
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| India | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 197 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 41 | 20% |
| Researcher | 27 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 25 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 19 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 16 | 8% |
| Other | 34 | 17% |
| Unknown | 42 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 22 | 11% |
| Chemistry | 21 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 20 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 19 | 9% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 6% |
| Other | 49 | 24% |
| Unknown | 60 | 29% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 16 July 2014.
All research outputs
#7,355,930
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#814
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#65,916
of 240,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#36
of 113 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 240,961 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 113 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 63% of its contemporaries.