| Title |
Supramolecular nanoparticles generated by the self-assembly of polyrotaxanes for antitumor drug delivery
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Nanomedicine, October 2012
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ijn.s33649 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Bin He, Liu, Lai, Li, Wang, Chang, Zhongwei Gu |
| Abstract |
A new approach of fabricating supramolecular nanoparticles generated by self-assembly polyrotaxanes for antitumor drug delivery has been reported. Cinnamic-acid-modified poly(ethylene glycol) chains were threaded in α-cyclodextrins to form polyrotaxanes. The polyrotaxanes self-assembled supramolecular nanoparticles. The morphology of the nanoparticles was changed from nanovesicle to micelle after the antitumor drug, doxorubicin, was loaded. The release profile of the drug-loaded nanoparticles was investigated, and it was found that the sustaining release time could last for 32 hours. The drug-loaded nanoparticles were co-cultured with mouse 4T1 breast cancer cells with a drug concentration of 10 μg/mL; the cell survival rate was 3.3% after a 72-hour incubation. In an in vivo study of breast cancer in a mouse model, the drug-loaded nanoparticles were injected in the tail veins of mice with a dose of 5 mg/kg body weight. The tumor inhibition rate of drug-loaded nanoparticles was 53%, which was better than that of doxorubicin hydrochloride. The cardiac toxicity of doxorubicin was decreased greatly after the encapsulation into supramolecular polyrotaxane nanoparticles. |
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 38 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 37 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 18% |
| Professor | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 5 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Chemistry | 10 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 5 | 13% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 8% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 3 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
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 05 October 2012.
All research outputs
#18,316,001
of 22,679,690 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#2,866
of 3,785 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#130,607
of 172,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Nanomedicine
#51
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,679,690 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,785 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.3. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% 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 172,125 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.