ReviewNanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2017
Trigger-Responsive Gene Transporters for Anticancer Therapy.
Review in Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland), 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Core-shell nanostructures: a simplest two-component system with enhanced properties and multiple applications.Environmental geochemistry and health · 2021Review
- Ruthenium-containing supramolecular nanoparticles based on bipyridine-modified cyclodextrin and adamantyl PEI with DNA condensation properties.Nanoscale research letters · 2018Article
- Polydopamine-based nanoparticles with excellent biocompatibility for photothermally enhanced gene delivery.RSC advances · 2018Article
- Gene therapy with RALA/iNOS composite nanoparticles significantly enhances survival in a model of metastatic prostate cancer.Cancer nanotechnology · 2018Article
- Core-Shell Nanoparticles as an Efficient, Sustained, and Triggered Drug-Delivery System.ACS omega · 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
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the current era of gene delivery, trigger-responsive nanoparticles for the delivery of exogenous nucleic acids, such as plasmid DNA (pDNA), mRNA, siRNAs, and miRNAs, to cancer cells have attracted considerable interest. The cationic gene transporters commonly used are typically in the form of polyplexes, lipoplexes or mixtures of both, and their gene transfer efficiency in cancer cells depends on several factors, such as cell binding, intracellular trafficking, buffering capacity for endosomal escape, DNA unpacking, nuclear transportation, cell viability, and DNA protection against nucleases. Some of these factors influence other factors adversely, and therefore, it is of critical importance that these factors are balanced. Recently, with the advancements in contemporary tools and techniques, trigger-responsive nanoparticles with the potential to overcome their intrinsic drawbacks have been developed. This review summarizes the mechanisms and limitations of cationic gene transporters. In addition, it covers various triggers, such as light, enzymes, magnetic fields, and ultrasound (US), used to enhance the gene transfer efficiency of trigger-responsive gene transporters in cancer cells. Furthermore, the challenges associated with and future directions in developing trigger-responsive gene transporters for anticancer therapy are discussed briefly.
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.