ArticleNanotechnology2016
Combinatorial approaches to evaluate nanodiamond uptake and induced cellular fate.
Article in Nanotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Tumor Spheroid Uptake of Fluorescent Nanodiamonds Is Limited by Mass Density: A 4D Light-Sheet Assay.Chemical & biomedical imaging · 2025Article
- Fluorescent nanodiamonds as innovative delivery systems for MiR-34a replacement in breast cancer.Molecular therapy. Nucleic acids · 2023Article
- Impacts of Organomodified Nanoclays and Their Incinerated Byproducts on Bronchial Cell Monolayer Integrity.Chemical research in toxicology · 2019Article
- Toxicity screening of two prevalent metal organic frameworks for therapeutic use in human lung epithelial cells.International journal of nanomedicine · 2019Article
- Graphitic and oxidised high pressure high temperature (HPHT) nanodiamonds induce differential biological responses in breast cancer cell lines.Nanoscale · 2018Article
- Co-delivery of paclitaxel and cetuximab by nanodiamond enhances mitotic catastrophe and tumor inhibition.Scientific reports · 2017Article
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.
Funding
Abstract
Nanodiamonds (NDs) are an emerging class of engineered nanomaterials that hold great promise for the next generation of bionanotechnological products to be used for drug and gene delivery, or for bio-imaging and biosensing. Previous studies have shown that upon their cellular uptake, NDs exhibit high biocompatibility in various in vitro and in vivo set-ups. Herein we hypothesized that the increased NDs biocompatibility is a result of minimum membrane perturbations and their reduced ability to induce disruption or damage during cellular translocation. Using multi-scale combinatorial approaches that simulate ND-membrane interactions, we correlated NDs real-time cellular uptake and kinetics with the ND-induced membrane fluctuations to derive energy requirements for the uptake to occur. Our discrete and real-time analyses showed that the majority of NDs internalization occurs within 2 h of cellular exposure, however, with no effects on cellular viability, proliferation or cellular behavior. Furthermore, our simulation analyses using coarse-grained models identified key changes in the energy profile, membrane deformation and recovery time, all functions of the average ND or ND-based agglomerate size. Understanding the mechanisms responsible for ND-cell membrane interactions could possibly advance their implementation in various biomedical applications.
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.