ArticleActa biomaterialia2014
Development of optical probes for in vivo imaging of polarized macrophages during foreign body reactions.
Article in Acta biomaterialia, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed.
- Uptake of Cyclodextrin Nanoparticles by Macrophages is Dependent on Particle Size and Receptor-Mediated Interactions.ACS applied bio materials · 2024Review
- Tailoring biomaterials and applications targeting tumor-associated macrophages in cancers.Frontiers in immunology · 2022Review
- Review
- Targeted Imaging of CD206 Expressing Tumor-Associated M2-like Macrophages Using Mannose-Conjugated Antibiofouling Magnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles.ACS applied bio materials · 2020Article
- Imaging in Chronic Wound Diagnostics.Advances in wound care · 2020Review
- Chemokine releasing particle implants for trapping circulating prostate cancer cells.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Screening for new macrophage therapeutics.Theranostics · 2019Review
- Discovering Macrophage Functions UsingFrontiers in immunology · 2018Review
- Extended culture of macrophages from different sources and maturation results in a common M2 phenotype.Journal of biomedical materials research. Part A · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Plasticity of macrophage (MΦ) phenotypes exist in a spectrum from classically activated (M1) cells, to alternatively activated (M2) cells, contributing to both the normal healing of tissues and the pathogenesis of implant failure. Here, folate- and mannose-based optical probes were fabricated to simultaneously determine the degree of MΦ polarization. In vitro tests show the ability of these probes to specifically target M1 and M2 cells. In an in vivo murine model, they were able to distinguish between the M1-dominated inflammatory response to infection and the M2-dominated regenerative response to particle implants. Finally, the probes were used to assess the inflammatory/regenerative properties of biomaterial implants. Our results show that these probes can be used to monitor and quantify the dynamic processes of MΦ polarization and their role in cellular responses in real time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.