| Title |
Silica nanoparticle-based dual imaging colloidal hybrids: cancer cell imaging and biodistribution
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, August 2015
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s88311 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Haisung Lee, Dongkyung Sung, Jinhoon Kim, Byung-Tae Kim, Tuntun Wang, Seong Soo A An, Soo-Won Seo, Dong Kee Yi |
| Abstract |
In this study, fluorescent dye-conjugated magnetic resonance (MR) imaging agents were investigated in T mode. Gadolinium-conjugated silica nanoparticles were successfully synthesized for both MR imaging and fluorescence diagnostics. Polyamine and polycarboxyl functional groups were modified chemically on the surface of the silica nanoparticles for efficient conjugation of gadolinium ions. The derived gadolinium-conjugated silica nanoparticles were investigated by zeta potential analysis, transmission electron microscopy, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, and energy dispersive x-ray spectroscopy. MR equipment was used to investigate their use as contrast-enhancing agents in T1 mode under a 9.4 T magnetic field. In addition, we tracked the distribution of the gadolinium-conjugated nanoparticles in both lung cancer cells and organs in mice. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 20 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 38% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Researcher | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 8 | 38% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 2 | 10% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 2 | 10% |
| Materials Science | 2 | 10% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 3 | 14% |
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 30 August 2015.
All research outputs
#17,285,036
of 25,371,288 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,469
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,170
of 276,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#105
of 141 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,371,288 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 4,123 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 276,419 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.