Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32440560›Full record

ArticleBioengineering & translational medicine2020

Size, shape, and flexibility influence nanoparticle transport across brain endothelium under flow.

Maksymilian Nowak, Tyler D Brown, Adam Graham, Matthew E Helgeson, Samir Mitragotri

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Bioengineering & translational medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 75 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
75citing papers in PubMed
6.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

75 citing papers in PubMed, 200 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Equip your vehicle for the right terrain: Using features of local pathology to guide engineering of targeted drug delivery systems.Journal of controlled release : official journal of the Controlled Release Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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.

Maksymilian NowakJohn A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University 29 Oxford St. Cambridge MA 02138.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6655-3789
Tyler D BrownJohn A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University 29 Oxford St. Cambridge MA 02138.
Adam GrahamCenter for Nanoscale Systems Harvard University 11 Oxford St. Cambridge MA 02138.
Matthew E HelgesonDepartment of Chemical Engineering University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara CA 93106.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9384-4023
Samir MitragotriJohn A. Paulson School of Engineering and Applied Sciences Harvard University 29 Oxford St. Cambridge MA 02138.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2459-8305
Harvard University · USUniversity of California, Santa Barbara · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Nanoparticle-based therapeutic formulations are being increasingly explored for the treatment of various ailments. Despite numerous advances, the success of nanoparticle-based technologies in treating brain diseases has been limited. Translational hurdles of nanoparticle therapies are attributed primarily to their limited ability to cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB), which is one of the body's most exclusive barriers. Several efforts have been focused on developing affinity-based agents and using them to increase nanoparticle accumulation at the brain endothelium. Very little is known about the role of fundamental physical parameters of nanoparticles such as size, shape, and flexibility in determining their interactions with and penetration across the BBB. Using a three-dimensional human BBB microfluidic model (μHuB), we investigate the impact of these physical parameters on nanoparticle penetration across the BBB. To gain insights into the dependence of transport on nanoparticle properties, two separate parameters were measured: the number of nanoparticles that fully cross the BBB and the number that remain associated with the endothelium. Association of nanoparticles with the brain endothelium was substantially impacted by their physical characteristics. Hard particles associate more with the endothelium compared to soft particles, as do small particles compared to large particles, and spherical particles compared to rod-shaped particles. Transport across the BBB also exhibited a dependence on nanoparticle properties. A nonmonotonic dependence on size was observed, where 200 nm particles exhibited higher BBB transport compared to 100 and 500 nm spheres. Rod-shaped particles exhibited higher BBB transport when normalized by endothelial association and soft particles exhibited comparable transport to hard particles when normalized by endothelial association. Tuning nanoparticles' physical parameters could potentially enhance their ability to cross the BBB for therapeutic applications.

Indexed as

BBBendotheliummicrofluidicnanoparticlesneurological disorders

Identifiers

PMID32440560
PMCPMC7237148
OpenAlexW2995016017

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.