| Title |
Doxorubicin-loaded cell-derived nanovesicles: an alternative targeted approach for anti-tumor therapy
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, April 2017
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s131786 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wei Jiang Goh, Choon Keong Lee, Shui Zou, Esther CY Woon, Bertrand Czarny, Giorgia Pastorin |
| Abstract |
Cell-derived nanovesicles (CDNs) are an emerging class of biological drug delivery systems (DDS) that retain the characteristics of the cells they were derived from, without the need for further surface functionalization. CDNs are also biocompatible, being derived from natural sources and also take advantage of the enhanced permeability and retention effect due to their nanodimensions. Furthermore, CDNs derived from monocytes were shown to have an in vivo targeting effect, accumulating at the tumor site in a previous study conducted in a mouse tumor model. Here, we report a systematic approach pertaining to various loading methods of the chemotherapeutic drug doxorubicin into our CDNs and examine the differential cellular uptake of drug-loaded CDNs in cancerous (HeLa) and healthy (HEK293) cell lines. Lastly, we proved that the addition of doxorubicin-loaded CDNs to the HeLa and HEK293 co-cultures showed a clear discrimination toward cancer cells at the cellular level. Our results further reinforce the intriguing potential of CDNs as an alternative targeted strategy for anticancer therapy. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 109 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 109 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 18 | 17% |
| Researcher | 14 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 6% |
| Other | 3 | 3% |
| Other | 9 | 8% |
| Unknown | 32 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 23 | 21% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 20 | 18% |
| Engineering | 7 | 6% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 5% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 15% |
| Unknown | 33 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. 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 August 2020.
All research outputs
#2,175,305
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#82
of 4,122 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#40,442
of 323,961 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#4
of 100 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,122 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 323,961 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 87% of its contemporaries.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.