ArticleScientific reports2016
An MRI-based classification scheme to predict passive access of 5 to 50-nm large nanoparticles to tumors.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- In vivo dosimetry for proton therapy: A Monte Carlo study of the Gadolinium spectral response throughout the course of treatment.Medical physics · 2025Article
- Advancements in tantalum based nanoparticles for integrated imaging and photothermal therapy in cancer management.RSC advances · 2024Review
- Gas Delivery Relevant to Human Health using Porous Materials.Chemistry (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2024Review
- Supermagnetic Human Serum Albumin (HSA) Nanoparticles and PLGA-Based Doxorubicin Nanoformulation: A Duet for Selective Nanotherapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Craft of Co-encapsulation in Nanomedicine: A Struggle To Achieve Synergy through Reciprocity.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2022Review
- Advances in Magnetic Nanoparticles Engineering for Biomedical Applications-A Review.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- Recent Advances in Tumor Targeting via EPR Effect for Cancer Treatment.Journal of personalized medicine · 2021Review
- The Use of Alternative Strategies for Enhanced Nanoparticle Delivery to Solid Tumors.Chemical reviews · 2021Review
- Imaging methods to evaluate tumor microenvironment factors affecting nanoparticle drug delivery and antitumor response.Cancer drug resistance (Alhambra, Calif.) · 2021Article
- X-ray Zernike phase contrast tomography: 3D ROI visualization of mm-sized mice organ tissues down to sub-cellular components.Biomedical optics express · 2020Article
- Multiparametric investigation of non functionalized-AGuIX nanoparticles in 3D human airway epithelium models demonstrates preferential targeting of tumor cells.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2020Article
- Understanding the Uptake of Nanomedicines at Different Stages of Brain Cancer Using a Modular Nanocarrier Platform and Precision Bispecific Antibodies.ACS central science · 2020Article
- Heritable modifiers of the tumor microenvironment influence nanoparticle uptake, distribution and response to photothermal therapy.Theranostics · 2020Article
- Imaging-assisted anticancer nanotherapy.Theranostics · 2020Review
- Micro/nano-bubble-assisted ultrasound to enhance the EPR effect and potential theranostic applications.Theranostics · 2020Review
- Smart cancer nanomedicine.Nature nanotechnology · 2019Article
- Concurrent fluorescence and volumetric optoacoustic tomography of nanoagent perfusion and bio-distribution in solid tumors.Biomedical optics express · 2019Article
- Improving accessibility of EPR-insensitive tumor phenotypes using EPR-adaptive strategies: Designing a new perspective in nanomedicine delivery.Theranostics · 2019Review
- Lipid Nanoparticles and Their Hydrogel Composites for Drug Delivery: A Review.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Multi-modal characterization of vasculature and nanoparticle accumulation in five tumor xenograft models.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Nanoparticles are useful tools in oncology because of their capacity to passively accumulate in tumors in particular via the enhanced permeability and retention (EPR) effect. However, the importance and reliability of this effect remains controversial and quite often unpredictable. In this preclinical study, we used optical imaging to detect the accumulation of three types of fluorescent nanoparticles in eight different subcutaneous and orthotopic tumor models, and dynamic contrast-enhanced and vessel size index Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) to measure the functional parameters of these tumors. The results demonstrate that the permeability and blood volume fraction determined by MRI are useful parameters for predicting the capacity of a tumor to accumulate nanoparticles. Translated to a clinical situation, this strategy could help anticipate the EPR effect of a particular tumor and thus its accessibility to nanomedicines.
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.