Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24273594›Full record

ArticleNano today2013

High-resolution, serial intravital microscopic imaging of nanoparticle delivery and targeting in a small animal tumor model.

Bryan Ronain Smith, Cristina Zavaleta, Jarrett Rosenberg, Ricky Tong, John Ramunas, Zhuang Liu, Hongjie Dai, Sanjiv Sam Gambhir

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Nano today, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

22 citing papers in PubMed, 55 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. The Role of Optical Imaging in Translational Nanomedicine.Journal of functional biomaterials · 2022
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Particle tracking microrheology of cancer cells in living subjects.Materials today (Kidlington, England) · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Cancer Immunotherapy Getting Brainy: Visualizing the Distinctive CNS Metastatic Niche to Illuminate Therapeutic Resistance.Drug resistance updates : reviews and commentaries in antimicrobial and anticancer chemotherapy · 2017
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Bryan Ronain Smith318 Campus Drive East, E-150, Department of Radiology, Molecular Imaging Program at Stanford, Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.
Cristina Zavaleta
Jarrett Rosenberg
Ricky Tong
John Ramunas
Zhuang Liu
Hongjie Dai
Sanjiv Sam Gambhir
Stanford University · US

Funding

Stanford Nanocharacterization LaboratoryU54CA119367 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI GAMBHIR, SANJIV S · 2006 to 2010
$19.8M
How do Nanoparticles Target Cancer? An In Vivo Experimental/Mathematical StudyK99CA160764 · NCI · STANFORD UNIVERSITY · PI SMITH, BRYAN RONAIN · 2011 to 2012
$348k
NCI NIH HHS K99 CA160764NCI NIH HHS U54 CA119367
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanoparticles are under active investigation for the detection and treatment of cancer. Yet our understanding of nanoparticle delivery to tumors is limited by our ability to observe the uptake process on its own scale in living subjects. We chose to study single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs) because they exhibit among the highest levels of tumor uptake across the wide variety of available nanoparticles. We target them using RGD (arginine-glycine-aspartic acid) peptide which directs them to integrins overexpressed on tumor vasculature and on the surface of some tumor cells (e.g., U87MG as used here). We employ intravital microscopy (IVM) to quantitatively examine the spatiotemporal framework of targeted SWNT uptake in a murine tumor model. IVM provided a dynamic microscale window into nanoparticle circulation, binding to tumor blood vessels, extravasation, binding to tumor cells, and tumor retention. RGD-SWNTs bound to tumor vasculature significantly more than controls (P<0.0001). RGD-SWNTs extravasated similarly compared to control RAD-SWNTs, but post-extravasation we observed as RGD-SWNTs eventually bound to individual tumor cells significantly more than RAD-SWNTs (p<0.0001) over time. RGD-SWNTs and RAD-SWNTs displayed similar signal in tumor for a week, but over time their curves significantly diverged (p<0.001) showing increasing RGD-SWNTs relative to untargeted SWNTs. We uncovered the complex spatiotemporal interplay between these competing uptake mechanisms. Specific uptake was delimited to early (1-6 hours) and late (1-4 weeks) time-points, while non-specific uptake dominated from 6 hours to 1 week. Our analysis revealed critical, quantitative insights into the dynamic, multifaceted mechanisms implicated in ligand-targeted SWNT accumulation in tumor using real-time observation.

Indexed as

cancerIntravital microscopynanoparticlesserial imagingsingle-walled carbon nanotubesspecificitytargeting

Identifiers

PMID24273594
PMCPMC3836612
OpenAlexW2031793974

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.