Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29867737›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in neurology2018

Gold Nanoparticles for Brain Tumor Imaging: A Systematic Review.

Antonio Meola, Jianghong Rao, Navjot Chaudhary, Mayur Sharma, Steven D Chang

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in neurology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 7% 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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 85 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Innovative applications of advanced nanomaterials in cerebrovascular imaging.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Antonio MeolaDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Jianghong RaoDepartment of Radiology, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Navjot ChaudharyDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Mayur SharmaDepartment of Neurosurgery, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States.
Steven D ChangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Stanford University · USUniversity of Louisville · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDemarcation of malignant brain tumor boundaries is critical to achieve complete resection and to improve patient survival. Contrast-enhanced brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the gold standard for diagnosis and pre-surgical planning, despite limitations of gadolinium (Gd)-based contrast agents to depict tumor margins. Recently, solid metal-based nanoparticles (NPs) have shown potential as diagnostic probes for brain tumors. Gold nanoparticles (GNPs) emerged among those, because of their unique physical and chemical properties and biocompatibility. The aim of the present study is to review the application of GNPs for

methodsWe performed a PubMed search of reports exploring the application of GNPs in the diagnosis of brain tumors in biological models including cells, animals, primates, and humans. The search words were "gold" AND "NP" AND "brain tumor." Two reviewers performed eligibility assessment independently in an unblinded standardized manner. The following data were extracted from each paper: first author, year of publication, animal/cellular model, GNP geometry, GNP size, GNP coating [i.e., polyethylene glycol (PEG) and Gd], blood-brain barrier (BBB) crossing aids, imaging modalities, and therapeutic agents conjugated to the GNPs.

resultsThe PubMed search provided 100 items. A total of 16 studies, published between the 2011 and 2017, were included in our review. No studies on humans were found. Thirteen studies were conducted

conclusionExperimental studies demonstrated that GNPs might be versatile, persistent, and safe contrast agents for multimodality imaging, thus enhancing the tumor edges pre-, intra-, and post-operatively improving microscopic precision. The diagnostic GNPs might also be used for multiple therapeutic approaches, namely as "theranostic" NPs.

Indexed as

blood-brain barrierbrain tumorgliomagoldmagnetic resonance imagingnanoparticlephotoacoustic imagingRaman scattering

Identifiers

PMID29867737
PMCPMC5960696
OpenAlexW2800989749

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.