↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Article Metrics

Synthesis, pharmacokinetics, and biological use of lysine-modified single-walled carbon nanotubes

Overview of attention for article published in International Journal of Nanomedicine, September 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
28 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
41 Mendeley
Title
Synthesis, pharmacokinetics, and biological use of lysine-modified single-walled carbon nanotubes
Published in
International Journal of Nanomedicine, September 2014
DOI 10.2147/ijn.s66050
Pubmed ID
Authors

David Scheinberg, Joseph Mulvey, Evan Feinberg, Simone Alidori, Daniel Heller, Michael McDevitt

Abstract

We aimed to create a more robust and more accessible standard for amine-modifying single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs). A 1,3-cycloaddition was developed using an azomethine ylide, generated by reacting paraformaldehyde and a side-chain-Boc (tert-Butyloxycarbonyl)-protected, lysine-derived alpha-amino acid, H-Lys(Boc)-OH, with purified SWCNT or C60. This cycloaddition and its lysine adduct provides the benefits of dense, covalent modification, ease of purification, commercial availability of reagents, and pH-dependent solubility of the product. Subsequently, SWCNTs functionalized with lysine amine handles were covalently conjugated to a radiometalated chelator, 1,4,7,10-tetraazacyclododecane-1,4,7,10-tetraacetic acid (DOTA). The (111)In-labeled construct showed rapid renal clearance in a murine model and a favorable biodistribution, permitting utility in biomedical applications. Functionalized SWCNTs strongly wrapped small interfering RNA (siRNA). In the first disclosed deployment of thermophoresis with carbon nanotubes, the lysine-modified tubes showed a desirable, weak SWCNT-albumin binding constant. Thus, lysine-modified nanotubes are a favorable candidate for medicinal work.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 41 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
India 1 2%
Unknown 40 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 32%
Student > Bachelor 5 12%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 10%
Researcher 3 7%
Other 5 12%
Unknown 6 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 9 22%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 12%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 10%
Engineering 4 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Other 8 20%
Unknown 8 20%

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 24 September 2014.
All research outputs
#3,144,531
of 12,438,331 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#266
of 2,456 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#50,253
of 212,990 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#5
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,438,331 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,456 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% 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 212,990 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 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.