| Title |
HA/HSA co-modified erlotinib–albumin nanoparticles for lung cancer treatment
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Drug Design, Development and Therapy, July 2018
|
| DOI | 10.2147/dddt.s169734 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Yuzhou Shen, Wentao Li |
| Abstract |
Aim of this study was to prepare the hyaluronic acid and human serum albumin modified erlotinib nanoparticles (ERT-HSA-HA NPs) delivery system by a precipitation method. ERT-HSA-HA NPs were characterized for physical properties, such as morphology and particle size, and in vitro drug release. Moreover, the cytotoxicity, cellular uptake, in vivo studies of ERT-HSA-HA nanoparticle were investigated and compared in A549 cells. The ERT-HSA-HA NPs showed spherical morphology, and their hydrodynamic diameter was 112.5±2.8 nm. The drug loading amount and encapsulation efficiency were 5.6% and 81.2%, respectively. After 3 months of storage, no dramatic change, such as visible aggregation, drug content changes, and precipitation, in the appearance of ERT-HSA-HA NPs occurred. In vitro release showed that the release of ERT from HSA-HA NPs was slow, without obvious burst effects at an early stage. In in vivo studies, ERT-HSA-HA NPs showed a superior antiproliferative effect on A549 cells, and the HA modification strategy can also facilitate the high-efficiency uptake of ERT-HSA NPs by A549 cells. Pharmacokinetic studies showed that the form of NPs could significantly extend the role of ERT in vivo (provided higher bioavailability). However, there was no significant difference in the pharmacokinetic parameters between ERT-HSA NPs and ERT-HSA-HA NPs after intravenous administration. In terms of in vivo antitumor activity, ERT-HSA-HA NP-treated mice showed a significantly suppressed tumor growth and no relapse after 30 d of treatment. HA/HSA co-modified erlotinib albumin nanoparticles was expected to be a new strategy in the treatment of lung cancer. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 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 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 58 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 7 | 12% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 7% |
| Other | 9 | 16% |
| Unknown | 22 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 13 | 22% |
| Chemistry | 5 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 3 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 3% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 10 | 17% |
| Unknown | 23 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 23 July 2018.
All research outputs
#16,728,456
of 25,385,509 outputs
Outputs from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#1,011
of 2,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#210,510
of 341,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Drug Design, Development and Therapy
#37
of 65 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,385,509 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,268 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% 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 341,606 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 35th percentile – i.e., 35% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 65 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.