Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29544111›Full record

ArticleBiomaterials2018

Competition of charge-mediated and specific binding by peptide-tagged cationic liposome-DNA nanoparticles in vitro and in vivo.

Emily Wonder, Lorena Simón-Gracia, Pablo Scodeller, Ramsey N Majzoub, Venkata Ramana Kotamraju, Kai K Ewert, Tambet Teesalu, Cyrus R Safinya

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomaterials, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

40 citing papers in PubMed, 86 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. The treatment landscape of triple-negative breast cancer.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2024
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Lipid nanoparticle topology regulates endosomal escape and delivery of RNA to the cytoplasm.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Emily WonderMaterials, Physics, and Molecular, Cellular, & Developmental Biology Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.
Lorena Simón-GraciaLaboratory of Cancer Biology, Institute of Biomedicine and Translational Medicine, Centre of Excellence for Translational Medicine, University of Tartu, Ravila 14b, 50411 Tartu, Estonia.
Pablo ScodellerLaboratory of Cancer Biology, Institute of Biomedicine and Translational Medicine, Centre of Excellence for Translational Medicine, University of Tartu, Ravila 14b, 50411 Tartu, Estonia; Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute, 10901 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.
Ramsey N MajzoubMaterials, Physics, and Molecular, Cellular, & Developmental Biology Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.
Venkata Ramana KotamrajuSanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute, 10901 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA.
Kai K EwertMaterials, Physics, and Molecular, Cellular, & Developmental Biology Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA.
Tambet TeesaluMaterials, Physics, and Molecular, Cellular, & Developmental Biology Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA; Laboratory of Cancer Biology, Institute of Biomedicine and Translational Medicine, Centre of Excellence for Translational Medicine, University of Tartu, Ravila 14b, 50411 Tartu, Estonia; Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute, 10901 North Torrey Pines Road, La Jolla, CA 92037, USA. Electronic address: tteesalu@sbpdiscovery.org.
Cyrus R SafinyaMaterials, Physics, and Molecular, Cellular, & Developmental Biology Departments, University of California at Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA. Electronic address: safinya@mrl.ucsb.edu.
University of California, Santa Barbara · USDiscovery Institute · USUniversity of Tartu · EE

Funding

Tumor Microenvironment and Cancer ImmunologyP30CA030199 · NCI · SANFORD BURNHAM PREBYS MEDICAL DISCOVERY INSTITUTE · PI Michael Jackson · 1985 to 2026
$107.2M
Structures of Lipid-DNA Nonviral Gene Delivery Systems 4R01GM059288 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA SANTA BARBARA · PI SAFINYA, CYRUS R · 1999 to 2016
$4.2M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA030199NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM059288Wellcome TrustWellcome Trust WT095077MA
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cationic liposome-nucleic acid (CL-NA) complexes, which form spontaneously, are a highly modular gene delivery system. These complexes can be sterically stabilized via PEGylation [PEG: poly (ethylene glycol)] into nanoparticles (NPs) and targeted to specific tissues and cell types via the conjugation of an affinity ligand. However, there are currently no guidelines on how to effectively navigate the large space of compositional parameters that modulate the specific and nonspecific binding interactions of peptide-targeted NPs with cells. Such guidelines are desirable to accelerate the optimization of formulations with novel peptides. Using PEG-lipids functionalized with a library of prototypical tumor-homing peptides, we varied the peptide density and other parameters (binding motif, peptide charge, CL/DNA charge ratio) to study their effect on the binding and uptake of the corresponding NPs. We used flow cytometry to quantitatively assess binding as well as internalization of NPs by cultured cancer cells. Surprisingly, full peptide coverage resulted in less binding and internalization than intermediate coverage, with the optimum coverage varying between cell lines. In, addition, our data revealed that great care must be taken to prevent nonspecific electrostatic interactions from interfering with the desired specific binding and internalization. Importantly, such considerations must take into account the charge of the peptide ligand as well as the membrane charge density and the CL/DNA charge ratio. To test our guidelines, we evaluated the in vivo tumor selectivity of selected NP formulations in a mouse model of peritoneally disseminated human gastric cancer. Intraperitoneally administered peptide-tagged CL-DNA NPs showed tumor binding, minimal accumulation in healthy control tissues, and preferential penetration of smaller tumor nodules, a highly clinically relevant target known to drive recurrence of the peritoneal cancer.

Indexed as

DNAGene Transfer TechniquesLiposomesNanoparticlesPeptidesAnimalsAntineoplastic AgentsCationsGenetic TherapyHumansLipidsAntineoplastic AgentsCationsDNALipidsLiposomesPeptidesCationic liposome-DNA nanoparticlesC-end ruleCyclic RGDiRGDTumor-penetrating peptides

Identifiers

PMID29544111
PMCPMC5944340
OpenAlexW2953368144

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.