| Title |
Peptides and proteins used to enhance gold nanoparticle delivery to the brain: preclinical approaches
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s82310 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carolina Velasco-Aguirre, Francisco Morales, Eduardo Gallardo-Toledo, Simon Guerrero, Ernest Giralt, Eyleen Araya, Marcelo J Kogan |
| Abstract |
An exciting and emerging field in nanomedicine involves the use of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) in the preclinical development of new strategies for the treatment and diagnosis of brain-related diseases such as neurodegeneration and cerebral tumors. The treatment of many brain-related disorders with AuNPs, which possess useful physical properties, is limited by the blood-brain barrier (BBB). The BBB highly regulates the substances that can permeate into the brain. Peptides and proteins may represent promising tools to improve the delivery of AuNPs to the central nervous system (CNS). In this review, we summarize the potential applications of AuNPs to CNS disorders, discuss different strategies based on the use of peptides or proteins to improve the delivery of AuNPs to the brain, and examine the intranasal administration route, which bypasses the BBB. We also analyze the potential neurotoxicity of AuNPs and the perspectives and new challenges concerning the use of peptides and proteins to enhance the delivery of AuNPs to the brain. The majority of the work described in this review is in a preclinical stage of experimentation, or in select cases, in clinical trials in humans. We note that the use of AuNPs still requires substantial study before being translated into human applications. However, for further clinical research, the issues related to the potential use of AuNPs must be analyzed. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 5 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 60% |
| Members of the public | 2 | 40% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 133 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 21 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 16% |
| Researcher | 18 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 10% |
| Unknown | 25 | 19% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 18% |
| Chemistry | 21 | 16% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 15 | 11% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 10 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 21% |
| Unknown | 27 | 20% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 25 August 2015.
All research outputs
#14,600,553
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,525
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#126,556
of 276,431 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#35
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,123 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 276,431 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 53% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 141 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 73% of its contemporaries.