ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2014
In vivo immunotoxicity of SiO2@(Y0.5Gd0.45Eu0.05)2O3 as dual-modality nanoprobes.
Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bioinspired and stimuli-responsive nanocomposites for targeted therapy in ovarian and endometrial tumors.International journal of pharmaceutics: X · 2026Review
- Carbon Quantum Dots: In vitro and in vivo Studies on Biocompatibility and Biointeractions for Optical Imaging.International journal of nanomedicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have successfully synthesized SiO2@(Y0.5Gd0.45Eu0.05)2O3 nanocomposites as a potential dual-modality nanoprobe for molecular imaging in vitro. However, their immunotoxicity assessment in vivo remains unknown. In this article, the in vitro biocompatibility of our dual-modality nanoprobes was assayed in terms of cell viability and apoptosis. In vivo immunotoxicity was investigated by monitoring the generation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), cluster of differentiation (CD) markers and cytokines in Balb/c mice. The data show that the in vitro biocompatibility was satisfactory. In addition, the immunotoxicity data revealed there are no significant changes in the expression levels of CD11b and CD71 between the nanoprobe group and the Gd in a diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid (DTPA) chelator (Gd-DTPA) group 24 h after injection in Balb/c mice (p>0.05). Importantly, there are significant differences in the expression levels of CD206 and CD25 as well as the secretion of IL-4 and the generation of ROS 24 h after injection (p<0.05). Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images showed that few nanoprobes were localized in the phagosomes of liver and lung. In conclusion, the toxic effects of our nanoprobes may mainly result from the aggregation of particles in phagosomes. This accumulation may damage the microstructure of the cells and generate oxidative stress reactions that further stimulate the immune response. Therefore, it is important to evaluate the in vivo immunotoxicity of these rare earth-based biomaterials at the molecular level before molecular imaging in vivo.
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.