| Title |
Comprehensive evaluation of carboxylated nanodiamond as a topical drug delivery system
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s104859 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Dae Gon Lim, Ki Hyun Kim, Eunah Kang, Sun Hee Lim, Jeremy Ricci, Si Kwon Sung, Myoung Taek Kwon, Seong Hoon Jeong |
| Abstract |
The best strategy in the development of topical drug delivery systems may be to facilitate the permeation of drugs without any harmful effects, while staying on the skin surface and maintaining stability of the system. Nanodiamonds (NDs) play a key role with their excellent physicochemical properties, including high biocompatibility, physical adsorption, reactive oxygen species (ROS) scavenging capability, and photostabilizing activity. Z-average sizes of carboxylated ND (ND-COOH) agglutinate decreased significantly as the pH increased. Fluorescein-conjugated ND was observed only on the stratum corneum, and no sample diffused into the dermal layer even after 48 hours. Moreover, ND-COOH and ND-COOH/eugenol complex did not show significant toxic effects on murine macrophage cells. ND improved in vitro skin permeation >50% acting as a "drug reservoir" to maintain a high drug concentration in the donor chamber, which was supported by quartz crystal microbalance results. Moreover, ND-COOH could adsorb a drug amount equivalent to 80% of its own weight. A photostability study showed that ND-COOH increased the photostability ~47% with regard to rate constant of the eugenol itself. A significant decrease in ROS was observed in the ND-COOH and ND-COOH/eugenol complex compared with the negative control during intracellular ROS assay. Moreover, ROS and cupric reducing antioxidant capacity evaluation showed that ND-COOH had synergistic effects of antioxidation with eugenol. Therefore, ND-COOH could be used as an excellent topical drug delivery system with improved permeability, higher stability, and minimized safety issue. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 3 | 75% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 54 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 54 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 22% |
| Researcher | 6 | 11% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 7% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 4% |
| Other | 4 | 7% |
| Unknown | 21 | 39% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 5 | 9% |
| Materials Science | 5 | 9% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 4 | 7% |
| Chemistry | 4 | 7% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 20% |
| Unknown | 22 | 41% |
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 24 June 2016.
All research outputs
#15,091,901
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#1,655
of 4,123 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#156,327
of 311,864 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#47
of 120 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% 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 59% 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 311,864 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 120 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 60% of its contemporaries.